ELE Math

Committee Members: Michelle Watson, Julie Kreikemeier, Staci Shonka, Jennifer Mueller, Chris Sander, Shantelle Suiter, Joni Ebel, Anne Hughes, Jenni Strong

Feb 24 Math Committee Minutes:

MS/HS - Math teachers reached consensus of priority standards by the strand, explaining reasons for omissions.  Once the Table of Specs is released next fall, we will revisit both the Geometry and Data strands to check if decision-making supports preparation for the NeSA assessments.

HS  - High School teachers are close to completing the essential vocabulary list for Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II. Once completed, this list will be shared with MS, and eventually elementary teachers, with the intent of using a comprehensive K- 12 vocabulary focus.

Next Steps:  Finish vocabulary list and schedule a work day to complete curriculum guides.  Options include a day with sub coverage, a day during spring break, May 23 or 24, or summer.  Send possible dates to Amy.

MS - Middle School teachers worked on curriculum guides for their respective grade levels.  Guides must include course priority standards, unit title, big idea questions, essential vocabulary, pacing, unit priority standards, and essential learnings.

Next Steps:  Schedule a work day to complete curriculum guides and complete an essential vocabulary list. Options include a day with sub coverage, a day during spring break, May 23 or 24, or summer.  Send possible dates to Amy.

(From Unit Organizers to Curriculum Guide)

7.  Priority standard sequence (simple to complex)

8.  Threading of standards across units (see example matrix)

9.  Units of study & big ideas/questions (see slide 11)

10. Essential learnings & vocabulary (see unit organizers/templates)

Jan 20 Math Committee Minutes

Grades 6 - 12

Committee Members:  Michelle Watson, Julie Kreikemeier, Staci Shonka, Jennifer Mueller, Chris Sander, Shantelle Suiter, Joni Ebel, Anne Hughes, Jenni Strong

The  Standard/Curriculum Alignment process was explained and reviewed.  Committee members completed the first four process steps, and started discussion on the fifth step.

  1. Rationale & definition of terms
  2. Unwrapping the standards (skills, concepts, DOK)
  3. Priority standards (identify, compare, revise, select)
  4. Supporting standards (align/cluster if possible)
  5. Vertical alignment (gaps, overlaps, omissions)

Next Steps

Step 1 - Before Department Collaboration:

Go to the “CPS UnWrapped” document and click on the Alignment tab.

•For Grades 6 and 9 - 11, some of the standard indicators are missing.  These standards are listed below, and have also been added on the “CPS Unwrapped” document within the Alignment tab color-coded in bright orange. At the very least, these indicators should to be added as supporting standards.

Grade 6

Grades 9 - 11

Numeric Relationships

6.1.1b

Numeric Operations

6.1.2b

6.1.2e

Numeric Operations

11.1.2a

11.1.2c

11.1.2d

Algebraic Relationships

6.2.1.b

6.2.1.c

Algebraic Relationships

11.2.1d

11.2.1dh

Algebraic Processes

6.2.2g

Algebraic Processes

11.2.2.a

11.2.2.b

11.2.2.a

11.2.2.d

11.2.2.e

11.2.2.h

11.2.2.m

Algebraic Applications

11.2.3.a

Geometry Characteristics

6.3.1a

Geometry Characteristics

11.3.1.a

11.3.1.b

11.3.1.h

Geometry Measurement

6.3.3c

Geometry Measurement

11.3.3a

11.3.3b

11.3.3c

11.3.3d

Coordinate Geometry

11.3.2a

11.3.2b

11.3.2c

11.3.2g

11.3.2h

11.3.2i

11.3.2g

11.3.2k

Data Analysis & Applications

11.4.2a

11.4.2b

11.4.2c

11.4.2d

11.4.2e

11.4.2g

11.4.2h

11.4.2i

11.4.2j

11.4.2k

Data Probability

11.4.3.a

Step 2 - During Department Collaboration (Feb 11):

Go to the “CPS UnWrapped” document and click on the Priority tab. All of the priority standards are listed within this tab. This display helps to identify omissions and gaps in the vertical alignment.  

•An “omission” occurs when a standard indicator is not chosen for every standard.  

To eliminate omissions, there must be at least one critical standard indicator selected as a priority for each standard.

•A “gap” occurs when an identified priority indicator at one grade level is skipped or does not support the priority indicator at the next grade level.  

To eliminate gaps:  Each grade or course priority standards selections should reflect alignment with the grade or course above and below.  For example:  if students in grade 6 must show proficiency for one standard indicator in number operations, will that proficiency prepare students for the standard indicator selected in grade 7 number operations, as well as grades 8, etc?  

The example below illustrates some omissions and gaps in our vertical alignment for Number Operations.

Example:  Priority Standards Selected for Number Operations:  Students will communicate number sense concepts using multiple representations to reason, solve problems, and make connections within mathematics and across disciplines.

Alg II

Alg I

G 8

G 7

G 6

MA 7.1.2.a Solve problems using proportions and ratios (e.g., cross products, percents, tables, equations, and graphs).

MA 6.1.2.a Multiply and divide non-negative fractions and mixed numbers.

MA 8.1.2.b Simplify numerical expressions involving exponents and roots (e.g., 4^-2 is the same as 1/16).

MA 7.1.2.b Add, subtract, multiply, and divide rational numbers (e.g., positive and negative fractions, decimals, and integers).

MA 6.1.2.d Add, subtract, multiply, and divide decimals using the standard algorithm.

Ask:

a. What priority standard indicators must be added to your grade level or course to resolve the omissions?

b. Do the standard indicators prepare students for successful proficiency from one grade to the next? If not, what standarde indicators should be added to your grade level or course to resolve the gaps?

For example:  Does proficiency with indicators 2a and 2d (6th grade above) prepare students for successful proficiency with indicators 2a and 2b (7th grade above)? If so, move on, and if not, revise your priority selection.

Step 3:  During Department Collaboration (Jan 27 or Feb 3):

Go to the “CPS UnWrapped” document and click on the Alignment tab.

•Are you in agreement with the clustering of supporting standards?  If not, what changes would you recommend?