Van Hiele’s Learning Theory Mara Alagic. 2 June 2004 Levels of Geometric Thinking Precognition Level 0: Visualization/Recognition Level 1: Analysis/Descriptive.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reciprocal Teaching: Session 1. Twilight Course Overview Session 1: An Introduction to Reciprocal Teaching Introduction to the 4 key strategies used in.
Advertisements

GUIDED GROUP WORK IN MATHEMATICS
Vidya Pratishthans New English Medium School Presented by:- Mrs. Mala Karande Mrs. Geeta Bist Miss Varsha Charanti.
P.M van Hiele Mathematics Learning Theorist Rebecca Bonk Math 610 Fall 2009.
Shape and Pattern A look at how we teach this at Ranvilles Infant School.
Experiential Learning Cycle
Agenda. Mathematical Practices 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3. Construct viable arguments.
Dr. Jackie Sack NCTM Annual Meeting March 23, 2007 B u ild I t D raw It I n t er p r e t It.
Developing Geometric Thinking: Van Hiele’s Levels Mara Alagic.
CI 319 Fall 2007 Mara Alagic 1 Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels Adapted from Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). Development and learning process.
The van Hiele levels MA418 – Spring 2010 McAllister.
Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels Adapted from Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). Development and learning process. Acta Paedogogica Ultrajectina.
VDW Ch 20: Geometric Thinking
Flat Surfaces as Two- Dimensional Shapes Unit of Study: 3-Dimensional Shapes Global Concept Guide: 3 of 3.
Decompose Two-Dimensional Shapes
The van Hiele Model of Geometric Thought
1 Geometry and Spatial Reasoning Develop adequate spatial skills Children respond to three dimensional world of shapes Discovery as they play, build and.
Describe and Sort Two-Dimensional Shapes
Mathematics the Preschool Way
Grade 10. Benchmark 10.3.E Draw and construct representations of two-and three-dimensional geometric objects using a variety of tools, such as straightedge,
Geometric and Spatial Reasoning
Wheeler Lower School Mathematics Program Grades 4-5 Goals: 1.For all students to become mathematically proficient 2.To prepare students for success in.
CPD WORKSHOP 2 USING A CPD WORKSHOP PROGRAMME TO IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF CLASSROOM DIALOGUE SUPPORTED BY THE INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARD.
Learning Objectives Participants will discuss ways to integrate themes throughout their classroom. Participants will come up with their own ideas to increase.
Geometry Grades K-2. Goals:  Build an understanding of the mathematical concepts within the Geometry Domain  Analyze how concepts of Geometry progress.
Communicating Ocean Sciences to Informal Audiences (COSIA) Session 3 Teaching & Learning.
A Habits of Mind Framework Supports Knowledge for Teaching Geometry Daniel Heck Horizon Research, Inc. Chapel Hill, North Carolina Rachel Wing & Mark Driscoll.
TIPM3 Second and Third Grade Geometry November 3, 2010.
Compose Two- Dimensional Shapes Unit of Study: Two-Dimensional Geometry Global Concept Guide: 2 of 4.
An Introduction to Chapter 9: Geometric Figures
How classroom talk supports reading comprehension.
Van Hiele Levels of understanding shapes in geometry.
Professional Development October 27th 2010 Roosevelt S.T.A.Y.
Geometry and Measurement ECED 4251 Dr. Jill Drake.
Presentation is prepared for The Park City Mathematics Institute, Secondary School Teachers Program, July 9-July 20, 2007 by Akihiko Takahashi Building.
1 The van Hiele Model Matthew C. Robinson, Summer B 2006.
T1PM3 4 th and 5 th grade Math Institute Focus on Geometry, Measurement and Data & The Eight Mathematical Practice September 27, 2011.
Charlie Gilderdale University of Cambridge December2014 Mathematics Workshop 2: Teachers as creative, reflective professionals Inspiring teaching, Inspiring.
Class 4: Part 1 Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Class April 4, 2011.
PROCESS STANDARDS FOR MATHEMATICS. PROBLEM SOLVING The Purpose of the Problem Solving Approach The problem solving approach fosters the development of.
Chapter 10 Math Research has demonstrated that virtually all young children have the capability to learn and become competent in mathematics. ©2015 Cengage.
Decompose Two- Dimensional Shapes Unit of Study: Two-Dimensional Geometry Global Concept Guide: 3 of 4.
An Ideal van Hiele Web- based Model for Computer Programming Learning and Teaching to Promote Collaborative Learning Dr. J. Wey Chen, Professor Department.
Reading Strategies To Improve Comprehension Empowering Gifted Children.
Geometric Thinking Cohort Training October 9 8:30-3:30 Mid-Central Educational Cooperative.
Workshop 3 Supporting Students’ Oral Language Development Workshop 3 Supporting Student’s Literacy learning Slide1.
Using geometric vocabulary with meaning Math Alliance November 16, 2010 Beth Schefelker, Judy Winn, & Melissa Hedges.
Creating and thinking critically
The Learning Cycle as a Model for Science Teaching Reading Assignment Chapter 5 in Teaching Science to Every Child: Using Culture as a Starting Point.
Using GSP in Discovering a New Theory Dr. Mofeed Abu-Mosa This paper 1. Connects Van Hiele theory and its levels of geometric thinking with.
Geometric Shapes Tangram Activities The University of Texas at Dallas.
NC NAEP Project Middle Grades Module 2 – Activity 4 Research Reflections.
TIPM3 March 2, 2011 Kindergarten and First Grade.
NETA Power Point Slides to accompany: Prepared by Luigi Iannacci Trent University Copyright © 2013 by Nelson Education Ltd.
Geometry in NZC Shape - a teaching progression Sandra Cathcart LT Symposium 2009.
Geometry Shape Resource Kit
Using Geoboards. Identify and describe shapes (squares, circles, triangles, rectangles, hexagons, cubes, cones, cylinders, and spheres). This entire cluster.
© Crown copyright 2009 Slide /10 Teacher CPD programme – primary mathematics Strengthening mental, reasoning and communication skills in mathematics.
June 2000Developed by M. Jeans, L. Wedel-Isaacs, J. Worley Enhancing Geometry with Technology A geometry unit incorporating technology appropriate for.
CHAPTER 20 Geometric Thinking and Geometric Concepts
GeoGebra in Primary and Lower Secondary School Classrooms
K-6 Geometry Progression In Practice
Chapter 8 Geometry: Properties of shapes; position and direction.
Creating, Describing, and Comparing Shapes
Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels
Geometric Shapes Tangram Activities The University of Texas at Dallas.
The Geometer’s Sketchpad
K-6 Geometry Progression In Practice
TANGRAMS ACROSS THE CURRICULUM.
“Exploring the material world” Discovering forms
Presentation transcript:

Van Hiele’s Learning Theory Mara Alagic

2 June 2004 Levels of Geometric Thinking Precognition Level 0: Visualization/Recognition Level 1: Analysis/Descriptive Level 2: Informal Deduction Level 3: Deduction Level 4: Rigor

Mara Alagic3 June 2004 Learning Theory Phases Information Guided Orientation Explication Free Orientation Integration

Mara Alagic4 June 2004 Outline Learning theory phases Information Guided Orientation Explication Free Orientation Integration Example Theme: Properties of two-dimensional shapes Tools: Seven tangram shapes

Mara Alagic5 June 2004 Information Students should be encouraged to freely explore the materials; they will discover some properties & structures While students are playing, the teacher can observe and informally assess students’ thinking and language Give each student a tangram set and ask 'What can you do with these pieces?' Encourage students to share and talk about the shapes and pictures they have made Students begin to see how pieces fit together; they begin to discover the properties and relationships

Mara Alagic6 June 2004 Guided Orientation Activities are presented so that students’ attention is focused on particular characteristics of the shapes; Questions might be generated from the first phase: Choose two shapes. How many different shapes can you make with them? Use three shapes to make a new shape. How many ways can you make this shape? Which pieces can be made from three other pieces? Have students record what they find by tracing around the shapes, and share with others One activity will often lead to another, e.g. …

Mara Alagic7 June 2004 Explication Tasks and games that deliberately develop the vocabulary associated with the ideas that have been encountered so far The teacher clarifies terms the children are already using and introduces new terms Questions provide opportunities for the terms to be used: Which shapes have a right angle? How many lines of symmetry does each shape have? What is the same about all the triangles? Which shapes have parallel sides? …

Mara Alagic8 June 2004 Free Orientation Students engage in more challenging tasks that draw on the knowledge and skills previously developed Activities and problem-solving tasks are open- ended or can be completed in different ways The aim is to apply what they have learned and become more skillful How many ways can you make a square from some or all of the pieces? Complete classic tangram puzzles of outlines of animals Draw a tangram square (like the one illustrated above) on an 8x8 square grid, examine the pieces carefully in relation to the grid, then work out a way to enlarge all the pieces

Mara Alagic9 June 2004 Integration Opportunities are given for the students to pull together their new knowledge and reflect on it as a whole They should be able to express or summarize what they have learned in some way: For example, small groups of children can design charts, class books and displays that present what they have learned about the tangram shapes Small groups, pairs of students and individuals can design presentations (posters, class books, technology aided), games and lists of questions about what they have learned about the tangram shapes This will help students to logically organize their knowledge of properties of the shapes

Mara Alagic10 June 2004 References Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). Development and learning process. Acta Paedogogica Ultrajectina (pp. 1-31). Groningen: J. B. Wolters. A method of initiation into geometry at secondary schools. In H. Freudenthal (Ed.). Report on methods of initiation into geometry (pp.67-80). Groningen: J. B. Wolters. Fuys, D., Geddes, D., & Tischler, R. (1988). The van Hiele model of Thinking in Geometry Among Adolescents. JRME Monograph Number 3.