SLLIS Curriculum Review Committee Report Math Program Recommendations Taylor

Committee Members Spanish Program--Ana Lopez (5th); Raul Munoz Rodrigo (5th) Chinese Program--Tzu-Shan Huang (1st); Nannan Huang (4th) French Program--Kari Rivers (Kg); Yves Conseant (2nd); Sabrina Poirier (5th) International Program--Celine Dissel (6-8) Student Support Services--Renee Martin (Title l Literacy); Taylor Mitchell (SpEd); Christa Braun (ELL/ELA) Facilitator--Thurma DeLoach Taylor

Charge to the Committee By the end of June, SLLIS Curriculum Review Committee will recommend to the SLLIS Board of Education a Math instructional program that: Aligns with our SLLIS mission Aligns with the MO Learning Standards and Grade Level Expectations Is supported by empirical research as appropriate and effective in developing math problem-solving skills and conceptual knowledge in all SLLIS learners

Our Process: Key Steps Analyze characteristics of evidence-based math instructional programs Research high performing schools/districts Select 3-5 evidence-based programs for potential implementation & a deeper dive in our review Select core math instructional program to recommend purchase, training, and implementation for 2018-2019 school year Taylor Before we began we outlined our process: First we would review SLLIS’ current academic performance, interpret our mission statement, and dissect MO Learning Standards and Grade Level Expectations Then, we would research what components were essential to literacy instruction and student achievement in reading and writing Next we would research high performing schools and districts in the area to see what core programs were being implemented. We also wanted to review the curriculum maps published by these districts to see if we could adopt one and revise to meet SLLIS’ mission After identifying these programs we wanted to select 3-5 of the most promising for further review. We wanted to make connections with and get feedback from the schools who were using these programs every day. We also wanted to conduct site visits to observe the programs being used in the classroom Finally we planned to create a standardized program evaluation rubric based on a staff survey of SLLIS’ needs. After going through this process, we believed that we would be confident in our ability to select a core English Literacy program to recommend for purchase, training, and implementation for the 2018-2019 AY.

Evidence-based math instructional programs include: Big 5 Instructional Content Number and Operations Algebra Geometry Measurement Data Analysis and Probability

Big 5 Math processes Problem solving Reasoning and Proof Communication Connections Representations

Started with 10 programs and narrowed down to 4 Ready Math Math In Focus Go Math Eureka Math Investigations Every Day Math Bridges in Mathematics Envision Math Primary Math Saxon Math

2 Finalists: Ready Math and Eureka Math Both scored equally on EdReports review—highest ratings possible Both received excellent recommendations from reference schools/districts Both provide academic rigor, evidence-based instructional practices, strong alignment with MO Learning Standards Both emphasize a conceptual, problem-solving discourse teaching framework Both provide clear vertical alignment between grade levels Both companies provide high quality professional development and numerous on-line learning resources for teachers

End of the School year and summer happened Presentations for Ready Math and Eureka Math were in June Only 3 committee members were able to participate No “face to face” full CRC discussion on the positives and negatives between these 2 finalists CRC has not reached consensus on which of these two programs to adopt Ready Math—5 out of 11 members preferred Eureka Math—3 out of 11 members preferred No preference stated—3 out of 11 members

Now what? Waiting until later in the summer isn’t a viable option Purchasing and training needs to happen in July and early August Starting either program without high-quality PD at the start is not recommended Without committee consensus---Final program recommendation defaults to the administrative team Consider using 2018-19 as a “pilot implementation year” Full implementation of training plan—including on-site embedded instructional coaching Strong administrative over-sight of implementation fidelity

Questions and Comments