2008 K- 8 Core/Comprehensive Mathematics Curricula Review and Final Recommendations Presentation to State Board of Education by Dr. Terry Bergeson December.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Professional Development for CCSSM Curriculum Analysis Reviewers
Advertisements

Understanding Student Learning Objectives (S.L.O.s)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Transitioning California to a Future Assessment System California.
Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)
Putting it Together ….Student + Teacher Standards = ?
C OMMON C ORE S TATE S TANDARDS I NITIATIVE March 2010.
Common Core Standards English Language Arts and Mathematics GCS 3 June 2,
1 North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Fran Hoch & Hope Tesh Accountability Conference 2002 Limited English Proficiency Policy Changes North.
Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth Using meaningful evaluation to increase effectiveness of teachers and leaders.
Building Our Future: One Community, One School, One Child at a Time Goals of the Special Administrative Board St. Louis Public Schools October 14, 2008.
K-5 Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) Update
New Jersey Quality Single Accountability Continuum (NJQSAC)
2008 May 31Standards PD: Day 2 morning: slide 1 Feedback from Yesterday We want to begin today by reviewing some the things you said yesterday afternoon.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core State Standards Initiative Information Shared by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
August 6, 2009 Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction January 15, 2009 K-12 Mathematics Update.
November nd Substitute House Bill (2SHB) 2598 Revised K-12 science standards presented to Legislature by December 1, 2008 Final revised standards.
November No requirement to make recommendations Higher level review of alignment with Cross- cutting and Big Ideas from Revised Science Standards.
On-the-job Evaluation of Principals Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. Delaware SAELP Director Wallace Foundation National Conference October 25-28, 2006.
February, 2010 LEA Support Advisory Council. Agenda 2:30-3:00Discuss plan revision process (feedback and support) 3:00-3:30Discuss February workshops.
CCSS Mathematics Instructional Shifts 2 nd Grade Overview.
1 Massachusetts Draft of Prekindergarten Standards in Mathematics and English Language Arts Susan Wheltle, Donna Traynham, and Barbara Libby Massachusetts.
Core Pre-K Standards Review & Comment
1 R-2 Report: Success in algebra by the end of ninth grade A presentation to the Board of Education by Brad Stam, Chief Academic Officer Instructional.
1 Overview of STAAR State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness Academic Achievement Distinction Designation Committee (AADDC) April 16, 2012.
Title I, Part A and Section 31a At Risk 101
World-class Standards World Class Education Standards (WCES) are those standards that, when implemented through quality instruction and content, prepare.
Session 2: Introduction to the Quality Criteria. Session Overview Your facilitator, ___________________. [Add details of facilitators background, including.
Common Core at CPS Scope and Sequence Implementation Plan
PARTICIPATION AND ADOPTION OF THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS INITIATIVE 1 Transforming Education in Kentucky Felicia Cumings Smith Associate Commissioner Michael.
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS (CCSS) Welcome PVMS Parents!
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS INITIATIVE December
2013 Assessment and Accountability Information Meeting
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents
District Leadership Team Stakeholder Involvement in the District Strategic Plan! Session #4 April 12th, 2011.
The Need To Improve STEM Learning Successful K-12 STEM is essential for scientific discovery, economic growth and functioning democracy Too.
Enumclaw School District K-12 MATH ADOPTION PROCESS Mission of the Committee: To review the state math curriculum reports and recommendations from.
Florida Power-Library Schools Program!. Welcome! Welcome and Introductions –Ms. Miriam Needham FAME President.
Teacher Evaluation System LSKD Site Administrator Training August 6, 2014.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
PROCEDURES TO USE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEES TO REPLACE COMMON CORE'S STANDARDS 1.
“Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.” Accountability 2.0 and the World’s Best Workforce—What Does it Mean? World’s.
State Board of Education December 2013 Revision of Instructional Materials Adoption Process and Delay for Mathematics 1.
Why move to Common Core?  Preparation: The standards are college- and career-ready. They will help prepare students with the knowledge and skills they.
Instructional Materials Process and Progress Update Chief Academic Officer Quarterly Meeting November 13, 2012.
EDUCATOR CERTIFICATION UPDATE Michigan Association of School Personnel Administrators Conference December 3, 2010 Flora L. Jenkins, Director Office of.
1 Oregon Content Standards Evaluation Project, Contract Amendment Phase: Preliminary Findings Dr. Stanley Rabinowitz WestEd November 6, 2007.
Information on New Regents Examinations for SCDN Presentation September 19, 2007 Steven Katz, Director Candace Shyer, Bureau Chief Office of Standards,
1 Executive Limitation 12: Curriculum and Instruction Darlene Westbrook Chief Academic Officer Denise Collier Executive Director for Curriculum Monitoring.
SOCIAL SCIENCES STANDARDS REVIEW AND REVISION February 2009-June 2011 PRESENTATION TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.
Instructional Focus Meeting, September 22  Goals for today:  Overview of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) ▪ What are they? ▪ Where did they come.
Invention Convention Seth Krivohlavek Angie Deck.
Implementing the CCSS in Mathematics: Challenges and Strategies CCSSO National Assessment Conference June 2013 Elliott Asp, Ph.D. Assistant Superintendent.
Mt. Diablo Unified School District Elementary Mathematics Adoption Buy Back Day Thursday, August 27, 2009.
Common Core State Standards Initiative Common Core State Standards Initiative State Board of Education January 28, 2010.
Reform Model for Change Board of Education presentation by Superintendent: Dr. Kimberly Tooley.
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
2012 Instructional Materials Process for Bridge Year Drew Hinds and Paula Merritt Office of Educational Improvement and Innovation Oregon Department of.
Common Core Standards English Language Arts 1. Overview of the Initiative o State-led and developed Common Core Standards for K-12 in English Language.
1 Draft Content Standards for High School Mathematics Helen Maguire for Paul Hibbard Office of Educational Improvement and Innovation Oregon Department.
New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Finding Common Ground – A Convocation for Leadership: the New Jersey Standards and PARCC September 28, 2015 Kimberley.
CAA Options: Collection of Evidence CTE Connection December 8, 2006 Rod Duckworth, Director of Career and Technical Education OSPI.
OHIO LEARNING STANDARDS K-12 MATHEMATICS GRADE 3 BY: AMY FURMAN.
Prince William County Public Schools Strategic Plan “Providing a World-Class Education” Superintendent’s Advisory Council on Instruction November 14, 2013.
ICAN & Middle Level Accelerated Update Citizens Advisory Committee~ January 9, 2012.
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Mathematics Curriculum Materials Analysis Project Supported by the Council of Chief State School Officers, Brookhill.
Overview of the Initiative
Oregon’s Content Standards Revision Process
Overview of the Initiative
Minnesota’s Academic Standards
Presentation transcript:

2008 K- 8 Core/Comprehensive Mathematics Curricula Review and Final Recommendations Presentation to State Board of Education by Dr. Terry Bergeson December 10, 2008 Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction 1

Big Picture Overview Instructional Materials Review and Recommendations 2008 Second Substitute House Bill (2SHB) 2598 requires: Section 2, 7 (a-b): Within six months of the adoption of the revised math standards, OSPI must make recommendations to the SBE of no more than three basic mathematics curricula at each level – elementary, middle and high school for their official comment and recommendations within 2 months. OSPI may make changes and then adopt the recommended curricula. K-8 (elementary and middle) Timeline: K-8 standards adopted: April 28, 2008 OSPI Initial Recommendations to SBE: Sept SBE Comment/recommendations to OSPI: Nov OSPI Final Recommendations: Dec. 10, 2008

K-8 Instructional Materials Review Process and Background Foundation of the Review: 2008 Revised K-8 Mathematics Standards These Standards represent sound and carefully sequenced mathematical ideas Embody mathematical soundness Input prior to Review: SBE Math Panel and curriculum advisory groups to determine: Areas of focus for the review: Standards Content Alignment and Other Factors Weighting criteria: 0.70 for content alignment; 0.30 for Other Factors Content Alignment threshold minimum set at 0.70 Review Committee Selection: Highly qualified committee competitively selected consisting of K-2 educators, 6-8 educators, mathematicians, community representatives, curriculum specialists, administrators, and parents 3

K-8 Instructional Materials Review Process and Background, cont. Review Week: Rigorous and fair process Strong reviewer training on standards and review instruments/rubric Measures taken to mitigate possible reviewer bias and to provide transparency Data Analysis: Exploratory data analysis by two independent statisticians Quality control checks comparing random 10% of score sheets to electronic data to ensure accuracy of data entry and extract processes Rigorous design of statistical tests, validated by expert statistician Data Sharing and Input on Preliminary Draft: Sought advice from SBE Math Panel on the analysis, recommendations and process Presented preliminary results to legislators, districts, publishers, review participants, and public 4

Elementary (K-5) Initial Recommendations September 2008 Math Connects Bridges in Mathematics Rationale: Most closely aligned with state standards Math Connects fully available online Highest scoring programs overall Both exceeded the minimum content threshold 5

Middle School (6-8) Initial Recommendations September 2008 Holt Mathematics Math Connects Rationale Holt is clear leader, based on analysis Selection of Math Connects from pool of tied programs gives districts a K-8 system Both programs are fully available online 6

State Board of Educations Review of OSPIs Initial Recommendations October 2008 The State Board of Education contracted with Strategic Teaching to conduct a review of OSPI instructional materials review process and initial recommendations. Strategic Teachings work: Reviewed top four programs at K-5 and 6-8 Conducted mathematical review across key topics (mathematical soundness) Conducted a content alignment review at the Grades 2, 4, and 7 7

State Board of Education Recommendations to OSPI November 2008 K-5 Recommendations: Keep: Math Connects Revisit: Bridges in Mathematics Add: Math Expressions 6-8 Recommendations: Keep: Holt Mathematics Keep: Math Connects Add: Prentice Hall Mathematics 8

Final K-8 Core/Comprehensive Curricula Recommendations 9

Elementary (K-5) Final Recommendations Math Connects Bridges in Mathematics Math Expressions 10

OSPIs Revisit of Bridges in Mathematics Commissioned additional mathematical review of Bridges by two mathematics experts: Dr. Jim King, Mathematician and Mathematics Professor from the University of Washington Dr. George Bright, Mathematics Educators and Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Additional review included: Development of the key concepts called into question by Strategic Teachings review (multiplication, area of a triangle, fractions) Conclusion: Found Bridges in Mathematics to be mathematically sound 11

Addition of Math Expressions Math Expressions did not meet the alignment threshold of 0.70 and was therefore not included in the initial OSPI recommendations. Subsequent reviews by Strategic Teaching and by OSPIs reviewers indicated the content is sound and well developed. 12

Middle School (6-8) Final Recommendations Middle School (6-8) Final Recommendations Holt Mathematics Math Connects Prentice Hall Mathematics 13

Addition of Prentice Hall Mathematics Based upon the additional review by the State Board of Education contractor, OSPI has added this program to the recommendations. This program exceeds the alignment threshold of

Conclusion The legislature directed OSPI to recommend no more than three programs at the elementary, middle and high school levels. All six programs recommended for elementary and middle grades are mathematically sound. Recommendations are based on alignment to strong mathematics standards. Alignment review process was rigorous, inclusive and transparent. 15

Next Steps Some degree of supplementation will be necessary with every program reviewed as no one program aligns completely to the 2008 revised mathematics standards. There are viable programs being used in Washington State that are not included in the recommendations. Districts will need support from OSPI in adapting these programs to align with the 2008 Mathematics Standards. Results of the K-12 Supplemental Mathematics Materials Review will be issued in January

Thank you 17 Thank you.