Group T2 Action Plans
|
Team Name |
|
American Mathematical
Association of Two-Year Colleges |
|
Team Leader |
|
Rob Farinelli - rfarinelli@csmd.edu Susan S. Wood |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 16, 19 |
A large percentage of prospective teachers (some reports state as many as 50%) begin their postsecondary education at two-year colleges. These students take core curriculum mathematics classes as well as pre-service mathematics education classes. Therefore, two-year colleges are major players in the preparation of mathematics teachers. (Note: The plans outlined below are subject to the approval and endorsement of the two organizations.)
Near term plans for item #16 include:
· Inform the AMATYC and NACCTEP Boards of Director about these developments and the implications of the National Mathematics Panel Report.
· This team will promote identified promising practices about effective K-12 teachers in the two-year college mathematics and education courses.
· At the November 2008 AMATYC annual conference and the March 2009 NACCTEP annual conference information about the National Mathematics Panel Report will be shared in sessions and committee meetings.
· Newsletters and other organizational communication strategies will be employed to disseminate this information.
· Both organizations will connect the organization website with the National Mathematics Panel report and the Doing What Works website as well.
· The AMATYC Teacher Preparation Committee will begin collecting activities/practices for the pre-service mathematics classrooms as well as beginning to look at mathematics strands that cohesively connect the student’s progress from preschool through middle school in readiness for algebra.
· NACCTEP will investigate the possibility of convening a mathematics workshop for members to address the findings of the National Mathematics Report.
· Identify outcomes of potential organizational partnerships with other committed national mathematics groups.
Longer-term plans for item #16 and #19:
· Have AMATYC and NACCTEP Boards of Directors consider future strategies to implement these findings within the organizations. The organizations management can then chart the future direction of the groups.
· This team will promote identified promising practices about effective K-12 teachers in the two-year college mathematics and education courses.
· Future annual conferences or special workshops/institutes of both AMATYC and NACCTEP will allow theme sessions on report findings.
· Newsletters and other organizational communication strategies will be employed to disseminate progress toward report suggestions.
· The AMATYC Teacher Preparation Committee will continue collecting activities/practices for the pre-service mathematics classrooms as well as beginning to look at mathematics strands that cohesively connect the student’s progress from preschool through middle school in readiness for algebra.
· Within partnership arrangements, consider preparing policy statements with regard to content knowledge of pre-service teachers and the requisite preparation of those who teach pre-service teachers.
· Utilize partner organization research relationships to bolster knowledge about teachers prepared in community colleges and the performance of their students.
|
Team Name |
|
Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators |
|
Team Leader |
|
Nadine Bezuk - nbezuk@mail.sdsu.edu |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 17, 18, 19 |
The Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE) is interested in the Teaching and Teacher Education focus area, which is the focus of our work. Much of our ongoing work is centered in this area. AMTE can promote work on these recommendations in all of its endeavors, including our annual conference, monograph, and newsletter, as well as develop new initiatives that would address these recommendations.
AMTE’s plans regarding Recommendations 17, 18, & 19:
· Develop an ongoing working group that focuses on assessing mathematics teachers’ content knowledge;
· Create a directory on our website for measures of teachers’ content knowledge;
· Invite presenters of already-developed measures to conduct a workshop during AMTE’s annual conference; and
· Sponsor a summer workshop on developing appropriate measures of teachers’ content knowledge.
o Revisit
possible funding sources; seek collaboration with other organizations, such as
MAA, AMATYC, NACCTEP.
AMTE’s plans regarding Recommendation 18:
· Charge Research Committee with fleshing out this recommendation in a “Needed Research” statement; and
·
Continue
to seek ways to make the AMTE Monographs available to non-members.
AMTE’s plans regarding Recommendation 19:
· Facilitate (or co-facilitate with other organizations or projects) mechanisms for researchers who are working on the learning of mathematics for teaching to share measures, develop broader studies, collaborate on grant proposals;
· Have dedicated session(s) at the annual meeting for researchers to share what they are doing in this area; and
· Have dedicated session(s) at the annual meeting for mathematics teacher educators to share their work and develop ways to document pre-service and in-service teacher learning.
AMTE’s services include an annual conference, annual monograph, newsletters (three issues per year), and active committees, all of which are working toward improving mathematics teacher education.
|
Team Name |
|
Pearson - C |
|
Team Leader |
|
Mike Evans - mike.evans@pearson.com |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 18, 19 |
Goal
We hope to be involved in creating an action plan re: professional development regarding the mathematical knowledge for teaching and how such a program can be researched as to its impact on the use of our instructional materials and on student achievement. We will explore a variety of delivery options that will include, but not be limited to, online/on-demand, face-to-face topic specific workshops, lesson study, etc.
Primary Conclusions from Team Discussion
· Opportunity exists in an ability to bridge the current gap between mathematics thought leadership and the needs of practitioners.
· From an empirical point of view “math is math” (i.e. there is not difference in the subject matter to be conveyed and learned in Algebra, Geometry and Calculus, regardless of a student’s background or socio-economic status or a teacher’s subject matter expertise).
· However, since our goal is to ensure that all students learn mathematics, we must consider individual student and teacher circumstances, and devote significant time and effort to those considerations in order to ensure mathematics mastery. In practice it’s more challenging than “math is math”.
· This means solving for the best way to support students and teachers as individuals. That way they can lead themselves as opposed to creating one path that they are required to follow.
· In addition, the variation in mathematics standards between states and even between individual school districts further illustrates that in practice “math is not math”. Therefore, providing teachers with the support they need to succeed in their individual environment is critical.
Action Plan
· Research and provide initial recommendations on potential professional development offerings focused on practical strategies for building teacher mathematics knowledge.
Ø Identify the specific mathematical topics where teacher mastery will translate into instructional success.
Ø Determine the best approaches to conveying those topics to teachers who may not see mathematics as an area of core expertise.
· Determine the most effective ways to deliver mathematics professional development so that teachers can build their knowledge base in a manner that works for them (i.e. online, in-person, on-demand, etc.).
· Design offerings that view the teacher as a client to be served (i.e. help them lead versus requiring them to follow).
· Design offerings that allow for peer-to-peer collaboration so that teachers can help each other build expertise.
|
Team Name |
|
American Federation of Teachers |
|
Team Leader |
|
Alice J. Gill - agill@aft.org |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 20 |
Plan
AFT created and has offered professional development in mathematics for elementary teachers since 1990 as part of its Educational Research and Dissemination program (ER&D). These research-based Thinking Mathematics courses grew out of AFT teacher/researcher collaboration under a 1988-1992 NSF grant. Since their inception, these courses have had a dual role—to connect teachers with research on how children learn math and to strengthen their own knowledge of mathematics. In the summer of 2007, we piloted training for our newest course “Thinking Mathematics for Middle School: Journey to Algebra.” We want to expand participation in the program given initial feedback. We also intend to follow up with teachers who have participated in this course to examine how it has changed their teaching practice and influenced student learning, whether it aids them in addressing the “Critical Foundations of Algebra” topics and what improvements could be made. We are also interested in any impact our courses have had on high school teachers who have participated in the classes. A major outcome of this examination would be to reexamine our courses in Thinking Mathematics and ensure they are aligned with the mathematical principles identified in the Math Panel’s report. We also plan to begin to have conversations about how we might begin to formally study the way in which our professional development courses influence the practice of teachers who have taken our courses as well as the achievement of their students.
Resources
The development work for the courses has been done over many years and the courses has been done over many years and the courses receive regular infusions of new information when it becomes available. This year, we trained more than 50 teacher –leaders from across the country during Summer Institutes. We work on a training of trainers model and their job is to use what they learned in classrooms, file reflections on use of the ideas they learned about, return to a Winter Institute, and then, with the support of their local schools and school districts, offer the course to colleagues and/or use what they have learned in coaching or mentorship positions. As a national union we have an established professional development program, access to teachers across the country, and credibility with teachers and many school districts based on prior professional development experiences we have provided.
|
Team Name |
|
Mathematical Association of America |
|
Team Leader |
|
David Bressoud - bressoud@macalester.edu |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 21 |
The MAA is a forum for many voices in the community. The organization has just concluded a large grant that addressed best practices in K-12 teacher preparation. A desired goal is to move research on mathematics education into pre- & in-service training. The recently NSF funded PMET(Preparing Mathematicians to Educate Teachers) program found areas of agreement with the National Math Panel Report and the recommendation suggesting teachers need to have a better mathematical base. PMET already has a distinguished record of bringing together mathematicians and specialists in mathematics education to debate and help shape issues surrounding curriculum and teacher preparation. There is tremendous value to having different groups come together to discuss concerns and collaborate on solutions. A forum “Finding Common Ground” was successful in executing this goal and led to the National Math Panel.
Some observations from the working group discussions:
Math,
Math Educators & Teachers – Addressing the Language Barrier
Mathematicians
like to talk to teachers. Math educators communicate and work with teachers.
However, communication breaks down between mathematicians and mathematics
educators. Math educators and mathematicians have different perspectives and
to some degree, a lack of respect for one another. Furthering this divide are
the segmented departments at universities which tend to isolate people and
prohibit them from greater collaboration in the preparation of math teachers.
Teachers have little time to be creative given the demands of K-12 education.
They should have more time to work with colleagues outside of the classroom and
have the ability to work in smaller professional communities with content
specialists who have intensive knowledge of the material they are using in the
classroom.
Next Steps and Recommendations from the Breakout Group
Þ Bridge the language gap between mathematicians, math educators, and teachers. Increase collaborative efforts to translate research to practice.
Þ Teachers don’t have time to be creative in the classroom from the increased demands of K-12 education. Teachers should have the opportunity to work in smaller learning communities as a part of teams and on-going professional development in partnership with math specialists in K-5. The community should support this in public policy to help teachers
Þ Increase national consistency in content knowledge and practice. Work with textbook publishers to maintain a balance of content and instruction. When developing textbooks, publishers should include the input of mathematicians, math educators and teachers.
Þ Collaboration and follow up is needed among the stakeholder organizations to address the pressing issues in training pre- and in-service teachers. In addition, small organizations and institutions need to come together with researchers to bring effective practices to all levels.
|
Team Name |
|
EduTron |
|
Team Leader |
|
Andrew Chen - schen@edutron.com |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19 |
EduTron plans to continue its work in the following areas:
1. Development and implementation of coherent and compact professional development service based on the recommendations of the NMAP Report. The main characteristics are solid content training and the central beliefs described in the Report.
2. Serve schools and district through leadership training, in collaboration with the National Institute of School Leadership (NISL), which centers on the findings of the NMAP Report.
3. Impacting higher education institutions through building partnerships among mathematics and education departments.
4. Impacting policy makers at state and federal levels by sharing EduTron’s research findings.