Friday, March 07, 2014

Seattle School District Seeks Input on Math Selections

From SPS:

Elementary math instructional materials - We want your feedback!
The elementary math adoption committee work has reached a critical stage. In looking to partner with parents and community to find the best possible math program for Seattle Public School students for the 2014-15 school year and beyond, the committee invites you to give us your thoughts and opinions. The committee is excited to have four possible math programs as viable candidates.

The committee is excited to have four possible math programs as viable candidates:
  • enVision
  • Go Math!
  • Math in Focus 
  • My Math
You can provide direct feedback at one of our display locations. There will be forms prepared for you to fill out at each site, as well as forms online. This is an opportunity to compare the programs and consider what type of program you think would be a good fit for your family and community, and most importantly, for your student.

From April 1 through April 25, please come to one of these schools during the school day:
  • Catherine Blaine K-8, 2550 34th Ave W
  • Bryant Elementary, 3311 NE 60th St.
  • Northgate Elementary, 11725 1st Ave NE
  • West Seattle Elementary, 6760 34th Ave SW
  • Wing Luke Elementary, 3701 S Kenyon St.
Or come to the Douglass-Trust Public Library, 2300 E Yesler Way, during open hours, 10AM to 6PM daily.

Click here for more information, or below for translated fliers.

• Amharic
• Chinese
• English
• Oromo
• Somali
• Tagalog
• Tigrigna
• Vietnamese

7 comments:

Concerned parent said...

After rejecting, what, 2 other CCSS aligned math texts including Everyday Math, why is SPS still insisting on using fuzzy Common Core aligned texts?!?!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

The Common Core State Standards for "content" for grades 1-7 are fairly GOOD. Unfortunately the Standards of Mathematical Practice, which were installed largely for political reasons, are not measurable and are not standards.

It is ironic that the SPS now seeks community input after discarding the community's number 1` choice JumpMath.

Here we see a process that is deeply flawed. Alignment with Standards has little to do with whether the material is presented in such a way that students can learn it or teachers can teach effectively with "aligned materials".

JumpMath has a commendable track record. Currently books for grades 4,5,6 are "Common Core" aligned. Grades 1,2,3 and 7,8 will be "Common Core" aligned and available for the 2014-2015 school year.

It seems that the SPS has an aversion to buying effective instructional math materials.

So why was JumpMath scored so low by the committee? What were they looking at? --- JumpMath Books that have a solid track record got among the lowest rating from the committee.

-- Dan Dempsey

Anonymous said...

NY Times April 18, 2011

A Better Way to Teach Math

Can we improve the methods we use to teach math in schools — so that everyone develops proficiency?

Looking at current math achievement levels in the United States, this goal might seem out of reach. But the experience of some educators in Canada and England, using a curriculum called Jump Math, suggests that we seriously underestimate the potential of most students and teachers.

Almost every kid — and I mean virtually every kid — can learn math at a very high level, to the point where they could do university level math courses,” explains John Mighton, the founder of Jump Math, a nonprofit organization whose curriculum is in use in classrooms serving 65,000 children from grades one through eight, and by 20,000 children at home. “If you ask why that’s not happening, it’s because very early in school many kids get the idea that they’re not in the smart group, especially in math. We kind of force a choice on them: to decide that either they’re dumb or math is dumb.”


Well guess it won't be happening in Seattle.

What kind of input from the community is the committee looking for?

"The committee is excited to have four possible math programs as viable candidates." I wonder if anyone else is excited?

-- Dan Dempsey

why said...

Dan,
Jump math was great until they aligned it with CCSS. We still love the older Canadian versions.

Stop CCSS said...

We attend an ALE and most of the students there used different math texts, majority of which are not CCSS aligned and were published prior to 2000 (Teaching Textbooks, Saxon Homeschool, older Singapore math, and Life of Fred are among the top of the list). The consulting teacher sits down with each parent once a month and gets a list of the chapters completed then lists which Common Core Standards were taught. All schools can align any text book to the CCSS, heck I have even seen the math done during cooking translated into CC Standards.
Schools need to break free from the idea that they need to buy the text book just because it's already aligned! Of course it's already aligned, the major textbook companies helped write the standards!!

Anonymous said...

Dear Why Said,

The most recent Canadian version is from 2009 and it is excellent. The Common Core version I believe is simply rearranging some topics.

I recently began using The CCSS version 6.1 grade with students and the Canadian version 8.1 with others.

I am in rural Nevada not Seattle.

-- Dan Dempsey