The 8 Standards for Mathematical Practice in the Common Core State Standards Names Here Content Created by June Apaza and Vicki Kapust

Outcomes Participants will: 1.Develop a better understanding of the 8 Standards for Mathematical Practice 1.Develop an understanding of how the 8 Practices will be integrated into instruction at each grade band. 1.Develop an understanding of how the 8 Standards for Mathematical Practice will be assessed along with the Content Standards.

Grade Level Overview Page

Standards for Mathematical Practice “The Standards for Mathematical Practice describe varieties of expertise that mathematics educators at all levels should seek to develop in their students. These practices rest on important “processes and proficiencies” with longstanding importance in mathematics education.” (CCSS, 2010)

Background Information: Standards for Mathematical Practice “These practices rest on important ‘processes and proficiencies’ with longstanding importance in mathematics education.” (Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks for Mathematics, 2011, p. 15) The NCTM process standards (2000) The National Research Council’s report Adding It Up (2001)

Underlying Frameworks NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

Underlying Frameworks

Strands of Mathematical Proficiency Conceptual Understanding – comprehension of mathematical concepts, operations, and relations Procedural Fluency – skill in carrying out procedures flexibly, accurately, efficiently, and appropriately Strategic Competence – ability to formulate, represent, and solve mathematical problems Adaptive Reasoning – capacity for logical thought, reflection, explanation, and justification Productive Disposition – habitual inclination to see mathematics as sensible, useful, and worthwhile, coupled with a belief in diligence and one’s own efficacy.

What’s different about CCSS? 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. - CCSS (2010, p.5)

Standards for Mathematical Practice

Grouping the Standards for Mathematical Practice (McCallum, 2011)

Integration of Standards for Mathematical Practice Not “Problem Solving Fridays” Not “enrichment” for advanced students Most lie in the process of arriving at an answer, not necessarily in the answer itself Every lesson should seek to build student expertise in Content and Practice standards

Integration of Standards for Mathematical Practice Each group will have a standard Rewrite the standard in your own words Respond to “How will incorporating this standard impact your teaching?” Share on poster with the large group

Integration of Standards for Mathematical Practice If we do things well, the teaching and learning will look different! Return to your standard and respond to the questions: What will the student be doing? What will the teacher be doing? What kinds of tasks will foster proficiency for this Practice Standard?

What Kind of Mathematical Tasks Contribute to Proficiency in the CCSSM Practice Standards ? Why Instructional Tasks are Important

Comparing Two Mathematical Tasks Martha’s Carpeting Task The Fencing Task

How are Martha’s Carpeting Task and the Fencing Task the same and how are they different? Comparing Two Mathematical Tasks

Grouping the Standards for Mathematical Practice (McCallum, 2011)

The Brownie Problem – Elementary Task Basic Student Budget Task – Secondary Task

Assessment and the Common Core Content & Practice Standards What types of evidence will students have to demonstrate to show they’ve mastered both the content and practice standards? What types of test questions will be developed to gather this evidence?

The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) SBAC is one of two federally funded groups of states that are designing assessments for the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics.

A National Consortium of States South Dakota is a member of The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. 29 states representing 48% of K-12 students 21 governing, 8 advisory states Washington state is fiscal agent

The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) SMARTER Balanced released a draft document outlining the content specifications that are intended to ensure that the assessment system accurately assesses the full range of the standards (including the Practice Standards). Assessments are scheduled for full implementation in (Field test questions are scheduled for 2013, however)

The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) Include a variety of question types: selected response, short constructed response, extended constructed response, technology enhanced, and performance tasks

Assessing Levels of Expertise Level 1: Demonstrating basic procedural skills AND conceptual understanding. Level 2: Assessing knowledge in a context where their work on complex tasks is scaffolded. Level 3: Unscaffolded situations that call on substantial chains of reasoning.

Claims & Evidence for CCSS Mathematics Assessments Claim #1—Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency. Claim #2—Students can frame and solve a range of complex problems in pure and applied mathematics. Claim #3—Students can clearly and precisely construct viable arguments to support their own reasoning and to critique the reasoning of others. Claim #4—Students can analyze complex, real- world scenarios and can use mathematical models to interpret and solve problems.

Claims & Evidence for CCSS Mathematics Assessments Claim #1—Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency. Claim #2—Students can frame and solve a range of complex problems in pure and applied mathematics. Claim #3—Students can clearly and precisely construct viable arguments to support their own reasoning and to critique the reasoning of others. Claim #4—Students can analyze complex, real-world scenarios and can use mathematical models to interpret and solve problems.

These 4 claims were developed based on the CCSSM Content and Practice Standards. Quotes from CCSSM, page 8: “The Standards for Mathematical Practice describe ways in which [students] ought to engage with the subject matter…” “Designers of curricula, assessments, and professional development should all attend to the need to connect the mathematical practices to mathematical content…”

Sample Task--Grade 8 from Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium A Claim #1, Level 1 example Claim #1—Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency. Level 1—Demonstrating basic procedural skills AND conceptual understanding.

Water Tank Problem: A water tank has shape and dimensions as shown in the diagram below. At the beginning the tank is empty. Then it is filled with water at the rate of one liter per second. Water Tank

Sample Tasks—Elementary, MS, HS Constructed Response, Level 2 Choose one task and work on the problem by yourself for about minutes. Elementary: T-Shirts MS: Taxi Cabs HS: Shadows Discuss your solutions AND explanations with others who worked on the same problem as you did. Analyze the instructional tasks in terms of opportunities for students to regularly engage in the Practice Standards.

Standards for Mathematical Practice

Web site for Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium:

Q & A Fill out End of Day Reflection form. Please respond to the survey about the workshop you will be getting in soon. Thank You!Thank You!