Adoption Cycle
For those who believed that Seattle Public Schools was supposed to be on a seven-year cycle for the adoption of instructional materials, and that we are overdue for a review of the math materials, you are right.
Here is a memo to the Board from Shauna Heath on the status of the adoption cycle.
She intends to use the coming school year, 2013-2014, as a "curriculum mapping year" for K-12 math, then spend the following year, 2014-2015, for "evaluation" with implementation coming in the fall of 2015. She's going to take three years to recommend math texts when the work is already overdue.
Here is a memo to the Board from Shauna Heath on the status of the adoption cycle.
She intends to use the coming school year, 2013-2014, as a "curriculum mapping year" for K-12 math, then spend the following year, 2014-2015, for "evaluation" with implementation coming in the fall of 2015. She's going to take three years to recommend math texts when the work is already overdue.
Comments
HP
Why not allow schools and teachers to make the choice for themselves? Why not at least allow them to make the choice from a limited menu of two to four options?
I have heard that having multiple texts complicates the professional development, but I don't see why it should. The District should be helping teachers with how to teach two-place multiplication, not how to teach page 59. Unless the PD is text specific - and there is no way that it should be - then having multiple texts should not complicate the PD.
There are PDs given with content but unfortunately they still have a focus on constructivist pedagogy.
The straight jacket approach of all schools doing the same math needs to end. Let more students have a chance to succeed with better approaches — the sooner, the better. Mercer Middle School on Beacon Hill is a great example where a better curriculum proved successful.
Ballard math teacher Ted Nutting was correct in his concerns over the discovery math approach now in place in most Seattle classrooms. He stated in the Seattle Times article today that students end up confused and lacking basic skills.
In my opinion, the discovery textbooks are terrible, especially for students with ADHD or language challenges. Remedial rates in college are unacceptable.
The Seattle School District needs to change course NOW.
S parent
There is a transition to Common Core Standards and while the WA 2008 math standards will be tested this year and next, I believe the following year's state assessments will align with the Common Core. Wouldn't this be reason enough to get new materials in place following next school year at the latest?
Superintendent Jose Banda used better math materials in his former district, from what I have been told. He is well aware of the criticism of math in our district.
The problem seems to be that everything gets bogged down with the curriculum administrators. They study everything forever without listening to the actual experiences of parents, experienced math teachers like Ted Nutting and Dan Dempsey, or UW professors such as Cliff Mass. All of us have asked for better math curricula for years.
It is up to parents to keep the pressure on. Talk to the directors in your areas and ask for a faster timeline for better math. We need a fundamentally sound math curricula and further delays are inexcusable.
S parent
If you look at Jerry Large's column, you have a tell from Zombro - she uses that great "drill and kill" phrase.
In my not humble opinion, her use of that phrase gives her about a 85% chance of being a re-form-ie.
Given both are 'new' to these positions, they've just figured out how to keep their mortgages paid for 3 more years! Heaven forbid there be some open monthly meetings and people look at what successful districts have done and issue a Purchase Order by 1 July!
Charlie - you're off base on your PD idea - even good books have glitches - I like going through the text with teachers who will be using it. However, if you're defining PD as the typical theoretical high-level-useless-U crap ...
ThenYouAreRight
Stunned again!!!
They are getting the most out of existing materials.....at a huge cost to each student.
If you are tired of tutoring it is time to complain to the highest people at the district.
S parent
What they did was diddle around for a year with this stacked-deck consensus thing where people were either worn down or hand picked to arrive at a pre-determined destination.
If you've been a math teacher for 10 or more years, in a few weeks you should be able to skim through 5 or 15 different texts in 1 level, do some googling, and pick #1, #2, and #3. If you need to spend months being a proof reader or copy editor, you need to quit and go write your own book, or stop being a self important pompous ass. If you have 10 teachers who define themselves as NOT reformies, 10 who are proud reformies, and 10 in the middle, you could have a survey monkey ranking in no time.
Algebra 2 or 1 or Geometry isn't ... designing a commercial airplane out of tape and glue - or traveling to Mars.
3 years of farting around to do ... what? Keep
YourMortgagePaid!
-FedMomof2
The directors on the C&I committee (McLaren, Peaslee, Debell) requested that the textbook review process be completed by November of 2013 prior to the election of new board directors. Unfortunately, when JSCEE staff stacked up the timeline, the process (starting this month) would conclude with a board vote in March 2014 on selected programs. Books would be in schools by fall of 2014. It's a rather involved process, governed by Policy #2015. There is no possibility of an official district-wide adoption to complete by fall 2013 without violating policy and we know that isn't the norm in Seattle.
Within the next month, the adoption committee should be formed and selection criteria developed. If you are a teacher, parent, or community member who is passionate about math and can peel back the layers of education-speak to bring forward sound math options, plan to submit an application for the committee.
Rick Burke
www.seattlemathcoalition.org
Look, Nutting states that he is labeled elitist as he only accepts high performers in his classroom. How does he get away with that? Maybe cause he's seventy?
Jerry Large says his kid appreciates all the conceptual stuff as a college junior. Wouldmjis son be so excited about math concepts at that level without the exposure from "discovery" type materials at an early age?
Read today's column about math in the Times, how solving hard to solve problems with your kids is the most important thing to do for your student.
I mean really, having to google to help your kid with math is a minus? Sounds like the best lesson they'll ever get.
Then there is Mr. Mass. Great guy, but math is his windmill. His rants got him canned from KUOW and he isn't a mathematician. Ya, he sees lots of kids needing remedial math, but I'm not sure that is from not doing old math. I'd bet its more a case of lower quality instruction due to large class size and poor working conditions for math teachers, which keeps the really bright ones in colleges or private sector jobs.
We want students who get the concepts, the history, the why and what for. For crying out loud, has no one noticed we have these little computers with us all the time to do the actual computation.
Math good
The problem with math education in Seattle is that by leading with the concept and de-emphasizing computational skill, many students are learning neither.
Moreover, the greatest flaw of CMP II is the "spiraling" curriculum. Students are not allowed the time and opportunity to achieve mastery of any of the concepts or skills because the focus changes and there is no opportunity to refer to earlier work.
Students receive a workbook and spend two or three weeks doing absurdly simple tasks. Then they are expected to make a huge leap to understand a complex math concept. They then spend a week attempting to demonstrate their understanding of the concept. Then the entire topic is dropped and not referred to again.
This teaches students to hate math for wasting their time with pointless, time-consuming, childish tasks and writing out essay answers to ridiculous questions. Then it teaches children that math concepts are unattainable. Then it teaches them to fake it for a week confident that if they can just get through a week of pretending to understand the whole thing will go away.
Yes, they're called brains.
Math Good, I have no idea what school you are attached to but guess what? There are actually people who do NOT have a computer at home. Who don't know how to use a computer. Whose own math skills could be lacking.
To supposed that every parent can have the ability or time or notion to teach their child is naive. It's just not possible for a variety of reasons. It's also not really the parents' job to teach basic math skills. That's what they pay taxes for so the state hires people who do this job.
Just because you have and know how to use a computer and have the time to do it, doesn't mean all parents do.
But, regarding using MSP for evaluating effectiveness...I personally know 5 classmates who are currently receiving private tutoring in math. Another chunk of parents supplement at home with workbooks and videos. There are also students who aren't meeting standards, so they qualify and receive school provided tutoring. In the end, our school is performing very well on standardized tests, DESPITE a horrendous math curriculum.
My point is, test scores are not necessarily an accurate device for evaluating curriculum (or at least solely.)
My kids were in a school where teachers could choose math books. One teacher with a liberal arts background chose a "fun product" which didn't prepare his class for math skills at the next grade level. That group stayed behind in math for the following year. Parents knew this and tried to get their kids into the other class.
Schools should not choose their own math books either. Otherwise one school with higher FRL numbers may decide that minority kids hate math and are hard to teach, so they choose an easier, watered-down textbook series. Meanwhile parents at the upper-class neighborhood across town push for stronger materials at their school. More of those parents had college math, and know their kids will need to be prepared. But the achievement gap gets wider.
Consistency of materials means that kids who move or switch schools or teachers won't get behind in math. It means parents can help their kids with homework without learning a new math system for each child. It gives parents a way to know if a concept topic or chapter was skipped by the teacher.
Teachers at each grade level should be comfortable teaching from the same math books used at every other school, regardless of student demographics. As long as the books are well-written and don't require specialized training and materials to use! Teachers still have flexibility for how they present the material, but a good textbook provides the framework and basis of knowledge to be covered.
The ROOT CAUSE of the math problems we have now is that our math books were chosen by teacher committee!
The solution? Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on ineffective SPS textbook adoption committees. We already have results from the excellent research done by the Washington State Dept. of Ed, their process and results are detailed here:
http://www.k12.wa.us/curriculuminstruct/pubdocs/PublishersNotices/OSPIMathematicsHS-IMR-Report06-19-09.pdf
NOTICE that the books rejected by this qualified group were exactly those adopted by SPS! Every district which followed these OSPI guidelines has scores higher than SPS!
Don't re-invent the wheel!
-Math mom
-- let's use MAP data for something useful
While I agree allowing individual classrooms too much latitude with the curriculum can lead to alignment issues and/or watering down the material, if I took your philosophy to its logical extreme then every school should have a completely identical curriculum across all subjects.
We recognize that kids have different learning styles and need different pacing all across the offerings in the district. In addition, parent's are continually clamoring for options, not standardization.
Rather than mandating a single textbook, I think the current process of reviewing any school's exemptions to make sure they meet a common standard is sufficient to make sure kids aren't short shrifted.
That being said, the price to opt-out is pretty steep and usually being covered by PTSAs. I also assume the district gets better rates on textbooks when buying in bulk. I don't think its a realistic district wide policy to expect widespread math textbook exemptions.
Ben
In CA, the state creates a list of approved texts and the districts only get funds for texts purchased from that list. Here, OSPI can only provide guidance on suggested texts.
Jane
curious
It may also be due to the turmoil in the District academic leadership - too many changes at the top. Enfield to Thompson to whatsherface who had the job for a couple months to no one to Tolley all in two years.
http://fairfieldmathadvocates.com/singapore-math-demystified-part-4-bringing-it-to-your-school/
CHM
This is probably the only beneficial and appropriate use of MAP data, despite all of this product's shortcomings.
I am 99% sure that folks downtown would NEVER endeavor to use MAP for this purpose. They do NOT want to use data in a way that might make their decisions and policies look non-efficacious.
Still, there is a way to get this analysis done:
1. a public disclosure request to get the de-identified student - or classroom or grade level (disaggregated by school name)- MAP data,
2. An spreadsheet program
3. Some data analysis know-how
4. write-up and dissemination of results.
Signed, Public Disclosure
Unfortunately, neither policy alternative guarantees good curriculum.
The need for parents to advocate for good curriculum will not go away, regardless of which approach is adopted.
Parent & Math Tutor
Dear Ms. Heath and Ms. Zombro,
I have read that the math curriculum will be studied for two years, for implementation in 2015. This is far too long.
We do not need further study on math. Parents have been telling the district for many years that the discovery math curriculum is failing their children. If the District had listened to parents, the Discovering textbooks in high school would not have been adopted. Now we have a conceptual approach from elementary through high school, leaving students confused, frustrated and testing into remedial classes in college — if they make it that far.
Ted Nutting had it right in the Jerry Large Seattle Times editorial this week. The discovery approach does not teach fundamentals or concepts well. Even good teachers cannot overcome such a fundamentally unsound curriculum.
These textbooks have few examples for students to follow. They are especially damaging to children with ADHD or language difficulties. Parents with means turn to tutoring to help their children but too many parents do not have the resources to do this. To keep failing the majority of students for several more years is unacceptable.
Look at the improvement at Mercer Middle School when the math curriculum was changed. Think about how many parents would choose Seattle Public Schools if they had more confidence in the math curriculum.
Math is the weakest link in the Seattle Public Schools. It is time to fix it and there is no time to waste.
Sincerely,
Georgi Krom
Parent of graduates of the Center School and Ballard High School
I would look at the parents of Mercer kids as the game changers there, with the more traditional materials being a way for them to be effective.
As far as the idea that the district is fully responsible for a child's education, well, parents are expected to step up as much as possible and there are mechanisms in place for kids who just can't get family help. I was reading a teacher's web page at Mercer and they(non gender specific pronoun) said they would make home visits to kids with missing or incomplete or failing work. Home visits! I mean this is trying out stuff for a economically poor but motivated population and it is working.
For schools with parents who are primarily english speakers, I think discovery type math is more rounded.
I've done tons with my kids and I find it fascinating and the spiraling particularly so. The stuff these kids know about probability by the end of middle school is impressive and very important. Statistics is a huge washout course in college and I think these kids will get it, when the time comes.
as for the basic computational skills, go get a singapore book at any store or online or ask a teacher for a few worksheets. The irony of it all is folks on this blog bemoaning their 6th graders missing out on Algebra 1, while at the same time trashing the EDM and CMP that got the kids to working a mere two years above grade level.
I want my kids not just to do Calculus, but to understand calculus; to know how Newton and the other guy figured it out and what the heck people use it for. Obviously I know neither the math or the history, but I look forward to learning it with my children.
Math good
Mercer Middle School may have great parents, but the change in math curricula cannot be ignored. Other schools have asked for different materials but they have to wait until the District studies this for several more years.
A few years ago 60 math and science professors at UW wrote a letter expressing their concern over the poor math skills of incoming freshmen. If they think we have a problem, I believe them.
G. Krom
-- curriculum matters
-books matter
Illinois Loop math reviews
You will note that some of the articles are about 10 years old...Seattle is somehow stuck in time.
-books matter