First, here's a link to School Board policy (see top of chart "Selection and Adoption of Instructional Materials").
To review, here's what we reported (via reader Rick B) in early January:
The top three programs are to be selected as
finalists by Friday the 10th. Additional copies of these finalist
programs will be ordered from publishers and distributed to ~5 locations
around the city for formal public review and comment during the month
Final selection of a single program will take place by
the end of March, to be submitted to the SB for introduction Apr 23rd
and approval May 7th.
Clearly, those finalists have not been selected (or, at least, no announcement made). The next meeting of the Math Adoption Committee is Feb. 7th so I would hope we would hear something then.
Also, SPS Communications reached out to us with the SPS Math Director, Anita Box. She was kind enough to answer some of my questions.
The process seems to be about half done. After the Committee picks three finalists, those three will then be announced and the public again allowed to review them and give input. (I asked about trends from the public from the first round but that won't be available until the January minutes of the Adoption Committee.)
What is interesting to me is that the final recommendation to the Board from the Adoption Committee IS the one that the Board will vote on. I had it in my head that the three finalists when to Shauna Heath, head of C&I, and then she/other district officials decided on the finalist.
Nope, Ms. Box said (and the policy backs that up) that the final choice of the Adoption Committee is the one submitted to the Board. (And, that's what Rick B's remarks indicate as well.)
I reread the policy and the only kind of violation I see is this:
The adoption timeline will be posted on the Curriculum & Instruction website, and through any other method defined in the communication strategy.
The timeline is not at the C&I website (and I would have expected to see it under Initiatives).
End of update.
There seems to be some mystery and oddities going on with the Math Adoption.
1) Many parents are asking - Where IS this process? Who are the finalists for the new math adoption?
2) Then we have this letter from some teachers at Pathfinder saying that none of curricula are "adequate for preparing the high standards of the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics." This is surprising because no curricula could be selected that did not meet CC standards. And that Pathfinder letter says that "there are curricula currently being developed" to meet CC "in its entirety" and yet they don't name it. If it were that vital for the Board and the Math Adoption Committee to look at this issue, why not name the curricula?
The Math Committee did say that they did NOT want any math that was "CCS lite" but that it would have a "sincere" alignment to CC state standards for Math. (Naturally, this is a moving target as no one state has had any real, long-term experience with teaching CC math standards.)
In a previous thread, I said what's the rush but I was wrong I had just
gone blank on how long math curriculum in SPS has been mostly bad for
most students. We need this new curriculum to meet the challenges of
Common Core AND to help our students get the best possible math
education they can.
I don't think a deadstop is a good idea.
3) I am hearing rumblings that the final three picks coming from the Math Adoption Committee may not be the ones the district announces.
That could be a problem and if you want to make parents suspicious for any future curriculum adoption committees AND blow a hole in this one - then that's the way to do it.
4) I know that one of the curricula was adopted by Highline. One Board member told me that he/she had examined the choices and felt that there were definitely some fine ones in there.
I would love to hear from members of the Math Adoption Committee (either in Comments or at