Group T7 Action Plans
|
Team Name |
|
Peoria (AZ) Unified School District |
|
Team Leader |
|
Shannon Ferguson - sferguson@peoriaud.k12.az.us |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 16, 20, 17 |
PUSD is interested in developing a comprehensive longitudinal study of teacher effectiveness based on historical data and classroom observation. The mathematics leadership team will collect data from course assessments and state and national norm reference tests to sort student progress and link it to effective teachers. Additionally, we will conduct random classroom observations to identify common characteristics and/practices of teachers that continue to show student success and achievement gains. This data will be collected, sorted, and shared with interested parties. Additionally, we will develop professional courses that encourage and build these practices.
Short term goals:
12 month goal:
12-18 month goal:
|
Team Name |
|
Arizona Department of Education |
|
Team Leader |
|
Mary Knuck - Mary.Knuck@azed.gov |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 10, 12 |
Rationale: The Arizona State Board of Education recently adopted a revised Mathematics Standard aligned with ADP Benchmarks, NAEP Framework, and the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Recommendations. The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) has proposed a more specifically defined K-8 Mathematics Endorsement, is developing an RtI statewide initiative that will include intervention in mathematics, and continues to support schools/districts in school improvement.
Components
The primary components are professional development and student intervention in mathematics.
Professional Development:
· Technical assistance focusing on understanding new standard
o Rolling out new standard at regional sessions
· Content- specific based on AIMS data
o Ongoing and regionally based (grade level bands)
· K-8 Endorsement – define coursework and design technical assistance and PD
o Complete approval process
o Organize focus group of Higher Education partners for input on content of courses
· Align MSP with specific focus on NMAP recommendations
o After approval of the endorsement, we will move forward on writing new RFP
· Assistance to schools/LEAs in school improvement
o Meet with ADE school improvement staff and review school improvement data on mathematics achievement
o Collaborate across ADE divisions on assistance plan to schools in school improvement
Mathematics Response to Intervention: (based on Supt. Horne’s annual state initiatives expected in January)
· Technical assistance on process
· Technical assistance in implementation
· Assessment/progress monitoring options
· Research-based Instructional Practices
· Intervention practices
|
Team Name |
|
San Francisco Unified School District |
|
Team Leader |
|
Jeanne D'Arcy - darcyj@sfusd.edu |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 18, 17 |
SFSUD Plan for Improving Teacher Effectiveness in Mathematics Instruction through Professional Development (recommendation 19)
DESIGN
· Begin with small scale, 3-5 elementary schools
o Representative of all student groups
· Middle and High School teachers trained to provide math (algebra) content-based PD to K-5 elementary teachers
o Acknowledge and build on internal capacities and strengths
o Build from existing partnership with SFSU
· Focus on algebra-readiness and beyond (articulate the skills, scope and sequence for algebra-readiness beginning with K)
o Support elementary teachers to 1) Narrow the number of math problems addressed in lessons and 2) Teach for mastery (close the lesson) rather than depend on a spiral curriculum
· All teachers will be supported by math content specialists
· All participants will receive additional PD around “Growth Mindset (Dweck)” and cognitive modifiability (NUA) to address students’ beliefs about learning related to their mathematics performance (recommendation 14)
· Provide additional training in pedagogy specifically addressing successful approaches for underserved students (AA, Latino EL, SpEd) – NUA (recommendation 13)
NEXT STEPS
· Identify schools, draft expectations for participation
· Identify teacher PD presenters, criteria for selection
· Outline PD needed for teacher presenters and content specialists
o Contact NUA and SERP – Growth Mindset, Cognitive Modifiability, pedagogy
o Math content – SERP, SFSU (through existing partnerships)
· Develop syllabus for elementary PD
o Possibly an institute at end of school year
o Follow up meetings throughout the year
o Coaching plan to support teacher practice
|
Team Name |
|
Nevada Department of Education |
|
Team Leader |
|
David Brancamp - dbrancamp@doe.nv.gov |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 20, 17 |
The state of Nevada is a district controlled state putting the Nevada Department of Education in an advisory role only or at best the enforcer of legislative mandates. This leads to a lack of identifying common problems within the state educational system and potential solutions. The curriculum team at DOE consists of one consultant in each of the four core content areas with various experiences in the educational system and background knowledge in curriculum, assessment, professional development and administration. With the emphasis on district control it has been difficult to bring all stakeholders to the table to determine an agenda.
The curriculum team has gathered sufficient data to recognize that “teacher knowledge” is the core of the difficulties in student success in mathematics K - 12. This data includes; scores in grades 3 – high school from the state CRT’s to legislative research linking standards to homework based on qualitative and quantitative responses. Based on our analysis, the DOE team will focus the action plan on both short and long term goals. The first goal (short term) is immediately organizing a professional development forum that follows the National Math Panel model (create agenda, revisit and rebuild the agenda). This will allow for a statewide dialogue on improving math education with a direct impact on teacher professional development/student achievement. The second goal (long term) will be to improve the current preparation of elementary teachers. DOE will facilitate a collaboration of higher education math departments, math education departments and master district classroom teachers to align P – 16 mathematics education and teacher preparation at all levels.
To ensure progress towards these actions DOE will mandate that all new state math MSP grants will align to the National Math Panel Report and recommendations. DOE will also establish a statewide Curriculum Advisory Committee to assist with the collaboration of the P – 16 systems. To allow ongoing dialogue with all stakeholders DOE must become the facilitator for this process thus demonstrating a proactive rather than the traditional reactive response to issues in Nevada education.
|
Team Name |
|
New Jersey Department of Education |
|
Team Leader |
|
Lucille E. Davy - lucille.davy@doe.state.nj.us |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19, 21 |
1. Teacher Preparation
Ÿ Content specific standards for elementary math (6 month)
Ÿ Timelines for college inclusion of standards (12 months)
Ÿ Timelines for state approval of college programs (18 months)
Ÿ College assessment of content specific standards in math - develop a state model (12 months)
Ÿ Teacher score on PRAXIS
2. Recruitment
Ÿ Address math and science teacher shortage
Ÿ Focus on alternate route improvements (12 month)
Ÿ Pre-service classroom experience
Ÿ Content preparation in LAL and Math
Ÿ More focus on content teaching
Ÿ Pilot program for mid-career displaced Wall Street professionals in math (3 month)
3. Mentoring/Induction
Ÿ More college/university involvement in mentoring (12 month)
Ÿ Schools as learning communities/teacher collaboration (12 month)
4. Professional Development
Ÿ Schools as learning communities (12 months)
Ÿ New professional development initiative that will focus on school level plans about teacher professional learning
Ÿ Coordinate all federal programs to support state initiatives (on-going as NGOs are developed)
Ÿ Title II, MSP, Title II HE, etc., Title I, District and School Improvement
Ÿ Focus on quality math and science initiatives
Ÿ Effective program research (current and ongoing)
Ÿ System of pilot programs and projects
Ÿ 4MAT for Algebra
Ÿ America’s Choice
Ÿ Math Next - Rutgers, Chamber of Commerce, IBM
Ÿ Intel Teacher Academy
Ÿ Assessment of Algebra Readiness
Ÿ Study impacts on achievement and implementation
|
Team Name |
|
Maryland State Team |
|
Team Leader |
|
Denny Gulick- dng@math.umd.edu |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19 |
The proposal is to form an Institute with similar organization to the institute at Park City and MSRI at Berkeley. We would initially investigate various models for this institute. The advisory board would include representatives from the various stakeholders from P – 20 in Maryland.
(1) The Institute would incorporate a form of the former summer Maryland Governor’s Academy . The Academy was a summer professional development program for current teachers and included a mixed group of in-service teachers, particularly at the elementary and middle school levels, and mathematics and mathematics education professors and in-service master teachers. Typically the Governor’s Academy ran for two weeks Mon –Thurs on a college campus – courses were team- taught and blended mathematics content and pedagogy. We expect the renewed Academy to be regionally based, as every region has a community college and college that can participate with local school districts. There is a tentative plan to have follow-up sessions in the winter for each cohort.
(2) The Institute would also serve as a clearinghouse for best practices and a resource center. We plan to have a program of Institute Fellows, teachers and college faculty, who would serve in this role for a designated period.
(3) During the year the Institute would sponsor short research/informational conferences on specific topics with students, teachers, experts on the topic.
(4) Teachers’ Circles will be organized around the state to give teachers an opportunity to network and learn together.
We will require funding for operations and the courses themselves and a home for the Institute.
Recruiting STEM majors and mathematics education majors.
(1) Invite both industry and faculty in STEM disciplines to discuss (a) recruitment of preservice teachers (using models such as UTeach), (b) recruitment of people from industry for teaching, and (c) funding of scholarships to attract prospective teachers.
(2) Revisit the introductory college courses that feed STEM majors/careers
(3) Sponsor a conference with all STEM disciplines on how to work together to increase the number of majors
Since there are four teams from Maryland at this MNP conference, we will actively explore opportunities for collaboration. Our team represents the Maryland State Mathematics Group (an ad hoc group of four-year and two-year college mathematics faculty with representatives of the Maryland State Department of Education).
|
Team Name |
|
Commonwealth of Massachusetts |
|
Team Leader |
|
Richard Bisk - rbisk@worcester.edu |
|
Area & Recs |
|
Teachers and Teacher Education 19 |
Context:
· Board adopts new knowledge requirements for elementary-level (1-6) teacher licenses (2007)
· Board votes to require new separately scored math test for elementary-level teacher licenses (2009)
· Guidelines document adopted by Board (2007) http://www.doe.mass.edu/mtel/MathGuidance.pdf
Plan going forward:
· Contingency planning for first administrations of elementary math test
We have set the bar high and may need to transition to that standard over 2-5 years.
· Extending Guidelines to PreK-2
This level of license has not yet been updated to reflect the new emphasis on math.
· Extending Guidelines to middle school teachers (6-8)
Middle-school teachers need similar depth of knowledge of elementary math.
· Extending Guidelines to the incumbent elementary workforce
In-service teachers need the same depth of knowledge that is expected of newly hired teachers. Everyone who teaches mathematics must be able to answer “Why?”
· Recalibrate the progression of difficulty throughout all math teacher tests/requirements
There are issues of consistency across the various licenses that involve mathematics.
· Professional development for higher-education mathematics faculty.
Mathematics faculty are calling for help with these new courses, via professional development workshops and support for regional collaboration among 4-year colleges and community colleges. We are designing a summer workshop for this purpose and have received proposals for follow-up implementation projects from several collaborative groups around the state for their local needs. We also want to get college math faculty to visit elementary classrooms. A model for this is MAA’s Preparing Mathematicians to Educate Teachers (PMET)
We are seeking funds for these projects.