Mark Freed Mathematics Education Specialist Oregon Department of Education State Instruction Material Review & other ODE work in TOTOM Conference 2014 Western Oregon University

Strategic Initiatives Update Connecting the World to Work – Regional STEM Hub Grantees Regional STEM Hub Grantees Six regional hubs awarded grants – STEM, STEAM and/or CTE Program and Activity Grant STEM, STEAM and/or CTE Program and Activity Grant 87 proposals, 16 awardees Network of Quality of Teaching and Learning – Series of 3 regional PLT conferences in fall, winter, and spring during school year – District grants to support Educator Effectiveness and Common Core implementation

Looking forward to PLT CONFERENCES Professional Learning Team Conferences – First day general sessions, keynote speakers – Second day, series of six break out sessions (Math, ELA, Science, ELP/ELL, Ed. Effectiveness [SLG, IRR]) Goal to establish a learning community of math leaders representing every school district – Support conversations and activities throughout the year (Oregon Portal if possible) – Train an expert group of educators to provide expertise in finding, evaluating, and sharing instructional materials

Looking forward to INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS Facilitated Independent Reviews – Piloted regional reviews in SOESD and Hillsboro SD – One day PD training on how to use Oregon Instructional Material Review Toolkit (OR-IMET) followed by three days of review (~2 programs per day) – Fall 2014 – intend to share OR-IMET, PD modules, and results from regional reviews Revise IM statues (ORS 337) and rules (OAR ) Participate in a possible multi-state collaborative to develop open education (OER) courses in CCSS Math and ELA

Looking forward to TITLE IIB (Math & Science Partnerships) Continued support of four STEM Partnerships – Enter third year of three year grant – Transition to be supported by regional STEM hubs Release RFP for – RFP released in August 2014 – Submit proposals Oct. 1 for funding in November 2014 – WebEx Mid-August to go over expectations

Areas of Focus for TARGET 1: Supporting quality instructional materials – Help find, share, evaluate, modify and create quality materials TARGET 2: Supporting quality instruction and learning – Implementation of Instructional best practices found in NCTM: Principles to Action TARGET 3: Support quality assessments & feedback – Help transition to Smarter Balanced, and best practices using both summative and formative data

Aligning to Focus Areas TITLE IIB (Math & Science Partnerships) OPTION 1 – Development of professional development opportunities to find, evaluate, share and modify quality instructional materials in math and/or science (Target 1 & 3) – All materials will be shared state-wide under open license (e.g. creative commons) OPTION 2 – Development of professional development opportunities to help develop instructional leaders in K-8 mathematics and/or science (Target 2)

Aligning to Focus Areas INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS Share resources and tools to support independent review of materials (Target 1) – Start with materials to evaluate basal programs – Optional ODE support of independent reviews in PD Supporting understanding of alignment to CCSS Math (Target 1, 2, & 3) – (1) Focus, (2) Coherence, (3) Rigor [application, conceptual understanding, procedural fluency], (4) Math Practices – Develop PD to support the evaluation of supplemental resources (e.g. tasks, lessons, units) Share and disseminate results of independent reviews (Target 1) Participate in development of multi-state OER resources (Target 1)

Using the Quality Review Rubric

OR-IMET 10

Grouping of Math Practices Reasoning and Explaining 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively 3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others Modeling and Using Tools 4. Model with mathematics 5. Use appropriate tools strategically Seeing Structure and Generalizing 7. Look for and make use of structure 8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning Overarching Habits of Mind of a Productive Mathematical Thinker 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them 6. Attend to precision Adapted from (McCallum, 2011) 11

Look for evidence 12

13

14 Using the Quality Review Rubric For each dimension: Make observations and suggestions related to criteria and evidence. Determine a rating for each dimension based on checked criteria and observations. Additional comments to improve the rating of the material in this section

Programs Reviewed – Summer 2014 Southern Oregon ESD* Elementary School – Bridges (K-5) – Engage NY (K-5) – Math Expressions – My Math – Investigations (incomplete materials submitted) Middle School – Core Focus – Connected Math 3 – Agile Mind – Go Math – Engage NY (6-8) 15 *note: materials were chosen by local districts since this was a local independent review.

Programs Reviewed – Summer 2014 Southern Oregon ESD* High School – HMH HS math (unpublished) – Big Ideas – College Prep Math – Core Plus – Pearson Math – Engage NY (attempted - incomplete) Hillsboro Regional Review* High School – HMH HS math (unpublished) – College Prep Math – Pearson Math – McGraw Hill Math – CK-12 – Engage NY (attempted - incomplete) 16 *note: materials were chosen by local districts since this was a local independent review.

Preliminary Results: Elementary (SUM 14) 17

Preliminary Results: Elementary (SOESD: SUM 14) 18 Program Name Bridges Engage NY Math Expressions My Math Alignment to CCSS Content 1.Focus 2.Coherence 3.Application 4.Conceptual Understanding 5.Procedural Fluency Alignment to CCSS Math Practices 6.Overall alignment to MP 7.Overarching habits of math thinkers (MP.1 & MP.6) 8.Reasoning and explaining (MP.2 & MP.3) 9.Modeling and using tools (MP.4 & MP.5) 10.Seeing structure and generalizing (MP.7 & MP.8)

Preliminary Results: Middle School (SUM 14) 19

Preliminary Results: Middle School (SOESD: SUM 14) 20 Program Name Core Focus Connected Math Agile Mind Go Math Engage NY Alignment to CCSS Content 1.Focus 2.Coherence 3.Application 4.Conceptual Understanding 5.Procedural Fluency Alignment to CCSS Math Practices 6.Overall alignment to MP 7.Overarching habits of math thinkers (MP.1 & MP.6) 8.Reasoning and explaining (MP.2 & MP.3) 9.Modeling and using tools (MP.4 & MP.5) 10.Seeing structure and generalizing (MP.7 & MP.8)

Preliminary Results: High School (SUM 14) 21

Preliminary Results: High School (SOESD & HSD: SUM 14) 22 Program NameReview Site Core Plus MathSOESD College Prep MathSOESD Big IdeasSOESD HMH MathSOESD HMH MathHSD Pearson MathSOESD College Prep MathHSD Pearson MathHSD McGraw HillHSD CK-12HSD Engage NYSOESD (partial) 22223

Aligning to Focus Areas PLT CONFERENCES Establish learning arc through three sessions – FALL: [Portland: 9/25-26; Eugene 10/7-8; LaGrande 10/14-15] What makes a quality instructional material? Where can I find it? (Primary Target 1: Quality Materials) – Winter: [Portland: 2/10-11; Eugene 2/19-20; LaGrande 3/3-4] How do I implement with fidelity? (Target 2: Quality instruction; NCTM: Principles to Action) – Spring: [TBD: June 2015] How do I know students learned it? How could I make it better? (Target 3: Quality assessment & Feedback)

Aligning to Focus Areas How can I help? – Title IIB Write a proposal! (Due on Oct 1, 2014) Help review proposals! (Oct 2-16, 2014) – Instructional Materials Participate in local, regional, and/or state reviews in 2015 Help develop quality lessons and units aligned to the CCSSM – Professional Learning Team Conferences Consider help presenting a session in 2015 Possible keynote opportunity in February/March sessions

Questions? Mark Freed Mathematics Education Specialist Oregon Department of Education Link to presentation files: