MATHEMATICS & THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS Today’s Agenda: 1. Propose three possible solutions to address the non-alignment of our K – 5 math instructional materials. 2. Share results of an instructional materials review. 3. Engage in a process to possibly reach consensus around a viable solution. 4. Gather feedback on potential next steps.

PURPOSE Share and discuss concerns arising due to the lack of alignment of Everyday Mathematics to CCSS-M.  Teachers are supplementing with a variety of supplemental materials.  It is easier to supplement procedural fluency than conceptual understanding.  Curriculum coherence is impossible due to teacher variations in supplementing, so students aren’t getting a guaranteed and viable curriculum in all schools.  Various stakeholders have shared their concerns about the alignment and suggested a supplemental curriculum that they feel is working to better teach the intent of the common core--focus, coherence, and rigor.

PURPOSE Share and discuss a way to restore curriculum coherence during this interim time period until a math adoption can take place.  Based on the concerns shared by our stakeholders, T & L conducted research and curricular reviews on current and suggested materials.  Today you will have the opportunity to come to consensus around one of three proposed solutions.

Communication Interim – Materials that replace the “core” materials for a specific amount of time. In our case, two years. Supplemental – Materials that are inserted into the existing “core” materials to meet the needs of students. UPCOMING ADOPTION PLANS

OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION: Option #1 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 CURRENT Everyday Math with intentional supplementing with Engage NY Option #2 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules Option #3 K – 2 Engage New York Modules 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules All options require time to arrange for curricular materials and plan meaningful professional development Communication

EDM 2015 LESSON LAYOUT  Part 1: Warm Up  Mental Math and Fluency  Routines  Part 2: Focus  Math Message and math Message Follow-Up  Focus Activities  Assessment Check In  Part 3: Practice  Practice Activity  Math Boxes  Home Link Part 1: Warm Up min. Part 1: Warm Up min. Part 2: Focus min. Part 2: Focus min. Part 3: Practice min. Part 3: Practice min.

ENGAGE NY LESSON LAYOUT  Fluency Practice  Happy Counting  Sprints  Concept Development  Lesson tied to Objective  Application Problems  Class problems  Individual Problem Sets  Student Debrief  Reflection and active processing of lesson Fluency Practice 7-20 min. Fluency Practice 7-20 min. Concept Development min. Concept Development min. Application Problems 0-20 min. Application Problems 0-20 min. Student Debrief 10 min. Student Debrief 10 min.

Collaboration TABLE TALK 1. Review the Engage New York and 2015 EDM materials. 2. Discuss your questions, comments and concerns about the materials. Feel free to call one of us over to your table to answer questions!

Option #1 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 CURRENT Everyday Math + Intentional Supplementing with Engage NY Option #2 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules Option #3 K – 2 Engage New York Modules 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules Communication Interim Curriculum Review Process Katherine Hansen, Lori Honig, Larissa Wright, Summer Green, Wendy Noyes, Kristin Powell

INTERIM CURRICULUM REVIEW PROCESS  Step 1: Overview of Focus on Major Work  Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool for CCSS Alignment in Mathematics (IMET) Grades K-8 from Student Achievement Partners  Section I: Non-Negotiable Alignment Criteria  Step 2: Overview of One Unit  EQuIP Rubric for Lessons and Units: Mathematics (derived from the Tri-State Rubric)  Section I: Alignment to Depth of CCSS Non-Negotiable  Sections II – IV: Other aspects of alignment

STEP 1: FOCUS ON MAJOR WORK  Recommendation: The materials should devote at least 65% and up to approximately 85% of class time to the major work of the grade with Grades K-2 nearer the upper end of that range, i.e., 85%. Recommendation: The materials should devote at least 65% and up to approximately 85% of class time to the major work of the grade with Grades K-2 nearer the upper end of that range, i.e., 85%. Both EDM 2015 and Engage NY met the criteria for Step 1, so both continued to Step 2.

STEP 1: FOCUS ON MAJOR WORK  Recommendation: The materials should devote at least 65% and up to approximately 85% of class time to the major work of the grade with Grades K-2 nearer the upper end of that range, i.e., 85%. EDM 2012 Grades 3-5 was not reviewed in Step 2 because it did not meet the criteria for Step 1.

STEP 2: FOCUS ON ONE UNIT EDM 2015 Grade 2Engage NY Grade 2  Unit 2: Fact Strategies  Focus on Major Clusters:  2.OA.A  2.OA.B  2.OA.C  2.NBT.A  2.NBT.B  Module 1: Sums and Differences to 20  Focus on Major Clusters:  2.OA.A  2.OA.B  2.NBT.B

3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension. 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension. 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension. 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension. 3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension. 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension. 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension. 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension. STEP 2: FOCUS ON ONE UNIT 3: Meets most to all of the criteria in the dimension. 2: Meets many of the criteria in the dimension. 1: Meets some of the criteria in the dimension. 0: Does not meet the criteria in the dimension.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? Everyday Math 2015Engage NY I. Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS (2)  Did not target grade level CCSS to the full depth II. Key Shifts (2) Did not provide an in-depth treatment of standards  Did not set especially high expectations I. Alignment to the Depth of the CCSS (3)  Targeted grade level CCSS to the full depth II. Key Shifts (3)  Provided an in-depth treatment of standards  Set high expectations

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? Everyday Math 2015Engage NY III. Instructional Supports (3)  Differentiation for students below and above grade level  Variety of technology options  Ease of use:  Familiar format for lesson planning (less time)  Manipulative kits available III. Instructional Supports (2)  No differentiation for students below and above grade level  No technology options  Ease of use:  Unfamiliar format for lesson planning (more time)  Manipulatives must be made/adapted

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? Everyday Math 2015Engage NY  Less Rigor  More Instructional Support  More Rigor  Less Instructional Support

TABLE TALK 1. Discuss the data from the Interim Curriculum Review Process. 2. Discuss your questions, comments and concerns regarding rigor vs. instructional supports. Feel free to call one of us over to your table to answer questions!

OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION: Option #1 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 CURRENT Everyday Math with intentional supplementing with Engage NY Option #2 K – 2 NEW 2015 Everyday Math 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules Option #3 K – 2 Engage New York Modules 3 – 5 Engage New York Modules All options require time to arrange for curricular materials and plan meaningful professional development Communication

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT One full day per grade level (Aug.) Develop plan for ongoing support Frontload initial training of A Story of Units & Module 1 Develop plan for ongoing support using online resources EDM EngageNY

PD / CURRICULUM NEEDS Option #2 New EDM K-2  Rigor EngageNY 3-5  Improve Instructional supports Option #3 EngageNY K-5  Improve Instructional supports  Additional PD this summer Turn & Talk: What do you notice? What are you wondering about? Communication Option #1 New EDM K-2  Rigor Old EDM 3-5  Alignment to CCSS  Rigor

QUESTIONS?

COMING TO CONSENSUS  Consensus decision making is a way of reaching agreement between all members of a group. Instead of simply voting for an item with majority rule, a group using consensus is committed to finding solutions that everyone actively supports, or at least can live with. Time to work towards consensus!

At your table, discuss and chart the pros and cons of each of the options we have shared with you today. After you have come to consensus, mark your choice and enter reasons and evidence in the box. Be ready to share!

Consensus GOAL Finding a solution that everyone actively supports, or at least can live with, for the next two years. Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4

POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS Principal Support:  Support the decision with staff.  Share communication about the decision with staff.  Devote LIT to intentional learning and planning upcoming units.  Use Late Arrival for PD if staff needs additional time.  Dedicate District Sponsored Collaboration to math.  Open up IC’s schedule to provide time for side by side coaching, planning, and teaching. More support for teachers will be coming soon!