addressing “the math problem:” working together on a group-worthy task dr. bill moore washington...
TRANSCRIPT
Addressing “The Math Problem:”
Working Together on a Group-Worthy Task
Dr. Bill MooreWashington State Board for Community & Technical Colleges
360-704-4346, [email protected] Re-Thinking Pre-college Math Project
Outline of Comments
1. What the work is really about
2. Why it’s “group-worthy”
3. How we’re approaching the work
4. Value/role of collaborative networks
It’s About Equity, Not Just Math
Why It’s a Group-Worthy Task
TIME
RESOURCES BIASES & ATTITUDESCONTROL
INERTIA
STRUCTURES & LOGISTICS
INCENTIVES
EGO
AUTONOMY
COMPLEXITY OF SYSTEMS
Administrative Support:Addressing Barriers to Transforming Practice
Transition Math ProjectStudent Attributes for Math Success
Algebra II ApplicationsRe-Thinking Pre-College Math Project
TMP Math Projects
Source: Uri Treisman & Jenna Cullinane, UT-Austin, from Achieving the Dream data
32% 27% 41%
33% 26%41%
Faculty Inquiry Groups
Knowledge Exchange Networks
Re-Thinking Pre-College Math
Changing the Core
We put an enormous amount of energy into changing structures and usually leave
instructional practice untouched…We are attracted and drawn to these [efforts] because they’re visible and, believe it or not, easier to do than to make the hard changes, which are
in instructional practice…
Richard Elmore, “The Limits of ‘Change’,” January/February 2002
Fundamental Shift: “Open Source
Teaching”Our understanding of learning will accelerate faster in
a teaching community that acts like a learning system—one that makes knowledge of what it takes to learn explicit, adapts it, tests it, refines practice, reflects, rearticulates, and shares that new knowledge. Teaching must become problematized, innovative and professional, taking research as its model.
Diane Laurillard, “Open Teaching: The Key to Sustainable and Effective Open Education”
And Another Problem…“The student described a terrific course offered by the college of agriculture, consisting of realistic problems tackled by student teams exploring and using the resources of a research university.‘I have never learned so much in a class. I didn’t even know I could learn like that.’‘That professor must be a wonderful teacher,’ I responded.The student laughed. ‘We did all the work; he just assigned the problems and helped out. He doesn’t know how to teach.’”
Larry Spence, “The Case Against Teaching,” Change, November/December 2001
Changing the Equation (NCAT)
National Repository of Online Courses
Knowledge Exchange Networks
Carnegie Statway Project Collaboratory
Developmental Education Initiative
Re-Thinking Pre-college Math Project
“Come for the Content, Stay for the Community”
Knowledge Exchange in Developmental Math
“Ladder of Engagement”Issue-oriented repository of
exemplary practices & resources
UPDATE OF K-12 MATHEMATICS
IN WASHINGTON STATE
Greta Bornemann, Director of MathematicsOSPI - Teaching and Learning [email protected]
You can’t wring your hands and roll up your sleeves at the same time.
Patricia Schroeder
High School MathematicsCredits
Requirements for Class of 2013and Beyond
Class of 2013 and Beyond Math Credit Requirements
At the request of the Legislature, the State Board of Education (SBE) amended the graduation requirements rule to add a third credit of math and to prescribe the content of those credits.
The rule was adopted in July 2008 and is in effect for the graduating Class of 2013.
WAC 180.51.066- new revisionThe SBE recently adopted newly revised language for this rule during their September 2010 board meeting.
Class of 2013 Math Graduation CREDIT Requirements
• The three mathematics credits required under this section must include the following mathematics courses:– Algebra 1/Integrated Mathematics 1– Geometry/Integrated Mathematics 2– Algebra 2/Integrated Mathematics 3 OR a third
mathematics credit elected per the student’s educational and career goals as expressed in the High School and Beyond Plan
• CTE-equivalent courses may be used for any of the math credits.
Class of 2013 Math Graduation CREDIT Requirements: Recent Changes to Rule
• The State Board of Education made changes to the math rule at their September 2010 meeting to:
– Permit students to take two required math courses at the same time (e.g., Algebra 1 and Geometry)
– Clarify the expected sequence of classes– Permit students not to take a required course as long as
they earn three math credits in high school AND take Algebra II/Integrated Mathematics 3
End-of-Course Testsin Mathematics
ESSB 5414 codified as RCW 28A.655.066
• Implement End of Course exams in Algebra 1, Integrated 1, Geometry and Integrated 2 as graduation requirements for the class of 2013 and beyond.
• OSPI will use math “State Course Codes” reported through
CEDARS to determine which students need to be tested with math EOCs in spring 2011.
• OSPI and US Dept of Education are developing a plan for which
math EOC is to be used for high school AYP. Scores will be “banked” for students taking EOC before the year required for high school AYP.
Mathematical Resources for Educators
• OSPI Mathematics Pagehttp://www.k12.wa.us/Mathematics
• Movers and Shakers listserv• High School Item Specificationshttp://www.k12.wa.us/Mathematics/TestItemSpec.aspx#EOCAssess
• End of Course Crosswalk Documentshttp://www.k12.wa.us/Mathematics/Crosswalks.aspx
• Updates for 2011 Document• Moodle for teachers to share resources
Superintendent Dorn Working with Legislature on Math Options
Superintendent Randy Dorn will be in discussion with key legislators to consider various options, including consideration of:
• Allowing students in the classes of 2013 and 2014 to meet the math graduation requirement by passing one EOC or one EOC Makeup
• Evaluating ways to deliver math Collections of Evidence that support this alternative and that are cost-effective
Common Core State Standards and Assessment Initiative
BACKGROUND:Beginning in the spring of 2009, Governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, 2 territories and the District of Columbia committed to developing a common core of state K-12 English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics standards.
Common Core State Standards Design
Building on the strength of current state standards, the CCSS are designed to be:
– Focused, coherent, clear and rigorous
– Internationally benchmarked
– Anchored in college and career readiness*
– Evidence and research based
*Ready for first-year credit-bearing, postsecondary coursework in mathematics and English without the need for remediation.
Washington Context
• Involvement since November 2009– Review and input on drafts of English language arts and mathematics
standards
• 2010 legislation (E2SSB 6696, Section 601) provides for: – “Provisional adoption” by the Superintendent by Aug. 2, 2010– Detailed report due to Legislature in Jan. 2011
• To include: detailed comparison, timeline and costs, recommendations for possible additions
– Formal adoption and implementation will begin following 2011 session unless otherwise directed by the Legislature
17 Governing States 14 Advisory States
CT, HI, ID, KS, ME, MI, MO, MT, NC, NM, NV, OR, UT, VT, WA, WI, WV
AL, CO, DE, GA, IA, KY, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD
Total Number of States = 31
Fiscal Agent: Washington State
The Purpose of the ConsortiumTo develop a set of comprehensive and innovative
assessments for grades 3-8 and high school in English language arts and mathematics aligned to the Common Core State Standards.
The assessments shall be operational across Consortium states in the 2014-15 school year.
Note: States must have formally adopted the Common Core State Standards by January 2012 in order to remain in the Consortium.
System Highlights:
• Summative assessments using online computer adaptive technologies
• Optional interim / benchmark and formative assessments
• Online, tailored reporting system
• Multi-state consortium benefits and efficiencies
34
Summer 2010 ― Summer 2011
School Year 2011-2012
School Year 2012-2013
School Year 2013-2014
School Year 2014-2015
Phase 1Adopt, Align & Plan1. Provisional adoption (ESSS 6696)2. Gather input on strategy for implementation
Phase 2Communicate, Develop Process, Resources for Transition &Implementation Phase 3
Transition to Common Core Standards
Phase 4Implementation 1. Spring 2014—pilot the assessment system 2. September 2014-June 2015—full implementation with state-wide assessment system.
Draft Implementation TimelineSummer 2010 to the 2014-2015 School Year
This is the time to consider and plan for transitioning, while continuing to implement our current standards.
It is not the time to stop strong, standards-based instruction…
Adoption ≠ Implementation
State Superintendent has authority to adopt –
States must adopt 100% of the common core standards and may consider adding 15%, if necessary
Once adopted, implementation would be phased in over several school years; assessment of the common core would follow in 2014-15 school year
Time and resources would be needed to support statewide implementation
The promise of standards
These Standards are not intended to be new names for old ways of doing business.
They are a call to take the next step. It is time for states to work together to build on lessons learned from two decades of standards based reforms.
It is time to recognize that standards are not just promises to our children, but promises we intend to keep.