Rapid model

[Amy Savill]

It makes sense to say the model is neither traditional or reform. Traditional was a lot of memorization, drill and practice. Reform focuses on open ended questions. Rapid does a lot of repetitive practice, but with small differences in the question to show important differences. It also prompts the learner to build their own knowledge, some could say this is similar to reform. The difference is that reform allows the learners to be very broad, so they may not learn the key elements they need to know. RAPID prompts them to know a key element of the task. It still requires the student to build the learning, thus fitting the constructivist learning model.

[Anna Kmiec]

The tradition model, which focuses on memorization or rote procedure, leaving no room for questioning and not leading purposefully to understanding. There is a focus on skills. The reform model could create opportunities for understanding but potentially leaves the student vulnerable to misconceptions, inefficient strategies and the need to integrate many ideas all at once. The RaPID model subtly leads to understanding but I also strongly felt like I was developing skills and knowledge at the same time. I could clearly ‘see’ how dividing by 5 words by connecting it it to dividing by 10. Dividing with a remainder became not a separate body of mathematical knowledge but connected to groups of 5. I was still the one building the understanding but I also had clear evidence to be able to explain why it works.

[Author]

Posts