Category: Weekly Reflection

For this sketchnote I just tried to think of topics that stuck with me over the last few weeks in this class. I had fun completing the sketchnote, but I don’t think it is for me. I like to copy sketch’s like from the internet or with something physical in front of me but when it comes to doodling I am not very good (I did indeed look up images to get inspiration for some of the doodles).

Since I’m hoping to teach senior math, coding and computational thinking actually make a lot of sense to include. Math is already about breaking problems into steps and thinking logically, which is basically what coding does. I could see coding being a cool way for students to explore patterns, model functions, or run probability simulations instead of just solving things on paper. At the same time, I think it has to be used intentionally. Not every math lesson needs coding, and I wouldn’t want students focusing more on the programming than the actual math ideas. If it’s used in the right spots though, it could help students see math as more practical and connected to real-world problem solving.

Gaming could also be a fun addition to a math class, but I think it works best in small doses. Games can make students more engaged and give them space to experiment with strategies and make mistakes without feeling like they’re being tested. Things like probability games, logic puzzles, or strategy-based challenges could help reinforce math concepts while still feeling interactive. That said, I wouldn’t want gaming to become the main focus of the class. If it feels more like entertainment than learning, the math can get lost. I think games work best as a way to spark interest or reinforce ideas rather than being the primary way content is taught.

Small Accessibility Practices That Often Get Missed

One thing that stood out to me from the post is how many simple accessibility practices are actually easy to implement but still get missed all the time. Things like adding alt-text to images, using proper headings so screen readers can navigate a page, and making sure links are descriptive instead of just saying “click here” are small things that make a big difference. I know I personally forget about alt-text sometimes when I’m quickly making slides or posting something online. It’s not usually intentional, it’s just not something people automatically think about unless they’ve been taught to design with accessibility in mind.

Why Accessibility Needs to Be Intentional

Another thing that surprised me a bit was how much intentional planning accessibility actually requires. The blog talks about how assistive technologies like screen readers or text-to-speech tools only work well if the digital content is designed properly from the start. That made me realize accessibility isn’t just about adding tools for students later, it’s really about how the material is created in the first place. I think a big reason these practices aren’t more commonly used is simply that many educators haven’t been explicitly shown how to do them. A lot of teachers are using digital tools every day, but accessibility design isn’t always part of that training, so it can easily get overlooked.

By Kasandra Knappett

This week we had a field trip to the Pacific School of Innovation and Inquiry (PSII) which is an independent high school that does personalized, inquiry-based learning instead of traditional classes. Instead of following set courses and schedules like the rest of their grade, they co-design their oen learning pathways with teachers based on their interests and curiosity. Teachers act as a facilitator of learning and are adapting conditions to fit each learner. The curriculum still agrees with BC’s requirements but is personalized to each student.

The main pedagogy at PSII is inquiry. Students learn through projects instead of lessons and test. The big benefit of this is that learning feels meaningful and personal. This system works really well for those that are highly motivated, independent, and comfortable taking ownership of their own learning.

Some limitations included shorting a student on their social experience. Because the school is small and very individualized, there are no big classes, team sports, and structured peer interaction is not a focus. Some students might also struggle at a school like this without more structure or clear expectations, especially if they need external motivation or routine. I know I would not thrive in a school like this. I thrive off social experiences and am not motivated enough to do well in a school like this.

In theory, PSII is amazing for certain learners. I really respect this model and love how it can really allow some learners to bloom in these classroom settings. I also love how the teachers meet with the students every morning to determine their plan and see where they need to go. Although it’s not for me, I hope they continue to open up more institutions like this for those that need it.

Here is a video of a tour of the school

One of the biggest limitations of GenAI, especially in math, is how easy it is for it to take away the struggle that students actually need in order to learn. Math isn’t just about getting the right answer, it’s about working through confusion, making mistakes, and figuring out why something doesn’t work. AI tools are really good at giving fast and confident answers, which can be tempting for students who are stuck or stressed. When sstudents use AI as a shortcut, they get the answer without the thinking, which doesn’t help them in the long run. There’s also the issue that AI isn’t always perfect. It can give you the wrong answer, skip steps or explain things in a way that sounds right but isn’t actually solid math, which is risky at the senior level. Especially if you are already confused.

That being said I don’t think GenAI has no place in Grade 11 or 12 math. I actually think it could be really useful if it’s framed properly. One idea I liked from the Edutopia article was using AI to support productive struggle instead of eliminating it. For example, students could try a problem first, then use AI to check where their thinking went wrong or ask for a hint rather than a full solution.

In a senior math classroom I could see GenAI being used in really specific ways. Students could use it to get feedback on their own written solutions, ask for alternative methods after solving a problem, or generate extra practice questions at different difficulty levels when studying. It could also help students who are stuck rephrase a question or break a complex problem into smaller steps. I wouldn’t want AI to replace teacher instruction or problem-solving time, but used intentionally and with clear expectations, it could act as a support tool that increases confidence and engagement without removing the struggle that makes math learning meaningful.

Here is a video on an effective way to use AI in a math class!

I would like to teach grade 11 or 12 math. I think H5P could be really useful in senior math, especially when I think about what we’re learning around formative feedback in our assessment class. Tools like H5P make it easy to give students immediate, low stakes feedback without everything needing to be graded. This is important to check for understanding without the pressure of getting a good grade. For example, I could use interactive videos where I walk through a problem and pause to ask what the next step should be, or why a certain method works. Students can get feedback right away and can then adjust their thinking before moving on.

I could also use short self check quizzes before tests, like quick reviews on factoring, derivatives, or trig identities, where students can see what they understand and what they need to practice more of. Another example would be interactive activities like matching graphs to equations or putting solution steps in the correct order. I wouldn’t use H5P all the time, but as a formative tool for practice, review, and concept checks, it fits really well with how we’re learning about assessment for learning.

Using video or audio as an assignment in a senior math class is definitely a bit unconventional, but I actually think that’s what makes it interesting. I wouldn’t replace traditional assignments with it, but I could see it working really well as an optional extension to increase engagement. Students could explain how they solved a problem, compare two different methods, or talk through a common mistake and why it happens.

This kind of assignment pushes students and they can do more than just getting the right answer and instead start explaining their thinking, which deepens understanding. To keep it engaging and low pressure I would give students lots of choice. They could do a screen recording, draw on paper and explain out loud, or just submit an audio clip. The focus would be on reasoning, not editing or presentation. I like this as a possible optional assignment because it gives students who enjoy explaining or teaching a different way to show their learning without forcing everyone into a format they’re uncomfortable with, especially when they have so much going on already.

Watching Most Likely to Succeed made the ideas of student-led and inquiry-based learning feel a lot more real than just talking about them in theory. What stood out to me and to others in our class was how different the classroom environment looked when students were actually directing their own learning. One group mentioned how powerful it was to see real-life examples of what happens when learning is led by student inquiry, and I felt the same way. The students in the film didn’t seem disengaged or passive. They were curious, motivated, and clearly invested in what they were doing.

That said, the film also made me realize how hard it actually is to change pedagogy in practice. One thing that came up in our breakout room was that pedagogy works together with many other factors. To really change how teaching and learning works, a whole system needs to shift together. Universities were a big example we talked about. They tend to be very rigid, assessment-heavy, and structured around grades and deadlines, which makes inquiry-based or student-led learning harder to sustain. If higher education still values traditional measures of success, it creates pressure for K-12 schools to stick with what feels “safe.”

I also found myself feeling a bit torn, which others mentioned too. While I loved seeing real-life examples of inquiry-based learning working so well, I couldn’t help but wonder how this model fits when students transition into higher education. There are so many benefits, like collaboration, problem-solving, and confidence, but I do think age and context matter. Younger students may thrive with open-ended inquiry, while older or shyer students might need more scaffolding to navigate expectations beyond high school.

What really excited me though was how community-focused the learning was. Multiple groups pointed out how community members were invited in to view student work, and I loved that idea. It gives students a sense of pride and belonging and shows them that their work matters beyond the classroom.

At the same time, I think equity and access are important to keep in mind. Student-led learning assumes a level of confidence, support, and access to resources that not all students have. Without intentional planning, some voices could easily be overshadowed. This makes formative assessment, relationship-building, and teacher guidance even more important in inquiry-based environments.

Hearing other perspectives in our learning pod really shaped my thinking this week. It reminded me why building a strong PLN matters, because it helps surface both the excitement and the concerns instead of oversimplifying things. Learning from others makes these big ideas feel more realistic and grounded.

Here is a link to the film for anyone that wants to give it a watch.