Challenging Courses and Curricula - Implementing Research

1. Challenging Courses and Curricula - Implementing Research North State Math Partnership Red Bluff Elementary School District, LEA Lisa Sandberg, Director

2. North State Math Partnership • Cohort 2 then Research Grant • Red Bluff Elementary Union School District, LEA • Partners: • Shasta, Siskiyou, and Tehama County Offices of Education (Region 2) • 45+ School Districts • California State University, Chico (Mathematics Project) • Center for Evaluation and Research

3. Primary Purposes of NSMP • Improve teachers’ subject matter knowledge. • Expose teachers directly to challenging curriculum. • Enhance the ability of the teachers to understand and enable their students to meet the California academic content standards for mathematics. • Provide instruction and practice in the effective use of content specific pedagogical strategies. • Use data and assessments to inform and monitor classroom practice.

4. North State Math Partnership • 30+ hour summer content week • 5 Saturday sessions during the school year • 40 hour SB472 Mathematics Professional Development Institute focusing on newly adopted textbook • 24 hours of face-to-face content coaching

5. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where did we start? Where are we now? • 2005: • 9 instructors (along with University Professor) • 3 groups of teachers • 3 different areas of study within number sense • 2006 and currently: • 4-5 instructors (along with University Professor) • 1 group of teachers • Content Coaches are the Content Instructors

6. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where did we start? Where are we now? • Chico Math Project Philosophy: offer support for high quality professional development to ensure that every student has a highly qualified teacher. • Through professional development opportunities, teachers develop balanced mathematics programs that include basic computation skills, conceptual understanding, and problem solving. • Students become empowered mathematically through developing mathematical reasoning as they gather data, analyze evidence, and build arguments to support hypotheses.

7. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where did we start? Where are we now? • The mission of the California Mathematics Project (CMP) is to develop and enhance K-12 teachers' content knowledge and instructional strategies aligned with the California State Board of Education adopted California Mathematics Content Standards and Framework. • Experiences in the CMP provide a rich environment for teachers to increase their understanding of the subject matter that they teach and enhance their instructional strategies in order to improve student learning. • These goals have become the mantra of NSMP instructors and form an integral part of the NSMP experience.

8. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where are we now? • Teachers experience an inquiry-approach with challenging curriculum. • The instruction and investigations provide them with content-specific pedagogical strategies as they sharpen their own thinking and develop problem-solving skills. • They actually experience the joy of discovery and “aha” moments. “The connection! Between [the] Pythagorean Theorem and rational numbers!” ‘The number System WOW!! I really benefited from this information. I think this is the first time in my experience that I understood the relationship between numbers of every kind. .”

9. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where are we now: Curriculum Focus in 3-year Cycles • Year 1 - Number Sense: • It provides meaning to the number system • Highlights the importance of multiple representations • Offers interesting problem-solving opportunities involving whole numbers and fractions. • Tasks were set up so teachers could interact with the mathematics, using their own ideas and strategies as they developed understanding through this student-centered approach.

10. Challenging Courses and Curricula Where are we now: Curriculum Focus in 3-year Cycles • Year 2 - Proportional Reasoning (Susan Lamon) • Year 3 - , Algebraic Thinking and Questioning Strategies (Mark Driscoll)

11. Measuring Teacher Growth • University of Michigan, Content Knowledge for Teaching Mathematics (CKTM) - Learning Mathematics for Teaching (LMT) • The measure looks specifically at number concepts and operations (NCOP), patterns, functions and algebra (PFA), and geometry (GEO). • Measures the changes in teachers’ ability to understand mathematic content and procedures by comparing pretest and posttest standard scores.

12. Measuring Teacher Growth LMT Results for NSMP Control and Treatment Teachers The data used in this analysis are from the LMT tests administered in August 2008 and July 2009 to treatment and control teachers of the NSMP Phase II Research Cohort This is a matched-pairs analysis

13. Treatment Group, Elementary School TeachersMean Pre-Test and Post-Test IRT Scores Note: Elementary School teachers were administered the 2004 LMT test version for Geometry and NCOP, and the 2006 LMT test version for PFA.

14. Treatment Group, Elementary School TeachersMean IRT Change (Std. Deviation) 0.25 to 0.30 = noteworthy 0.30 to 0.50 = often significant 0.50 to 0.75 = almost always significant 0.75+ = substantial and large

15. Treatment Group, Middle School TeachersMean Pre-Test and Post-Test IRT Scores Note: Middle School teachers were administered the 2005 LMT test version for Geometry, and the 2007 LMT test version for PFA and NCOP.

16. Treatment Group, Middle School TeachersMean IRT Change (Std. Deviation) 0.25 to 0.30 = noteworthy 0.30 to 0.50 = often significant 0.50 to 0.75 = almost always significant 0.75+ = substantial and large

17. Compare Groups (Elementary School Teachers)Mean IRT Change (Std. Deviation) 0.25 to 0.30 = noteworthy 0.30 to 0.50 = often significant 0.50 to 0.75 = almost always significant 0.75+ = substantial and large

18. Compare Groups (Middle School Teachers)Mean IRT Change (Std. Deviation) 0.25 to 0.30 = noteworthy 0.30 to 0.50 = often significant 0.50 to 0.75 = almost always significant 0.75+ = substantial and large

19. Measuring Teacher Growth Coaching Observations and Teacher Reflections: • A keyword analysis showed that specifically detailed implementation of newly-acquired pedagogy and content knowledge was included in: • 91% of the 180 observations completed by 5 coaches • 89% of the 335 reflections completed by 54 teachers

20. Measuring Teacher Growth Coaching Observations and Teacher Reflections: • A keyword analysis showed the use of the following terms: • Question: 378 • Pattern: 314 • Thinking: 232 • Use of individual white-boards: 220 • Manipulative: 176 • Questioning Strategies: 141

21. Measuring Teacher Growth Teacher Focus Groups: • “My depth of understanding has really increased.” • “This [professional development] challenges you to figure out a way to make math come to life. Math can be the subject of the day that's easy to plan. The PD days challenge you to kind of break out and try some different things. It gives you hands-on, right-away, where you can go back to the classroom and use it.”

22. Measuring Teacher Growth Teacher Focus Groups: • “[Coach] has taught me how to question the students to elicit critical thinking and there’s been a shift in my questioning.” • “Coaching was most valuable. I love [Coach]. She is involved. She feels what I'm feeling. She literally helped me find ways to get out of a frustrating situation (I felt like I was on stage being laughed at), and supported me and helped me do the lesson so it wasn't a total failure. And the meetings beforehand, to think about what you want to get across to the students, I think that's one of the most valuable pieces of this.”

23. Measuring Teacher Growth Teacher Focus Groups: • “Other teachers show up in my class when they know the coach will be there. The coach has been helpful in sharing strategies and tips with these other teachers, too, and they've really found it beneficial!” • “It [coaching]was the reason I chose to enter this project. Without a coach, your learning doesn't increase. The coach can give you feedback that's critical without being evaluative, and over time whatever we learn here gets put into place.”

24. Measuring Teacher Growth Teacher Focus Groups • “I found [EMA Data] real helpful. In fact, I sat down with my coach and pinpointed those areas that were weaker and those that were stronger. The test results helped direct my teaching when we got closer to testing for State Standards.” • “Looking at [EMA Data] I went, "Wow, my kids all did poorly on this portion. I missed this, or I need to either find it or we haven't gotten to it." It definitely drove my teaching after the test results.”

25. Measuring Student Growth Enterprise Math Assessments • A locally developed benchmark assessment, • Three trimester versions (Forms A, B, and C). • The final version of the assessment contains all of the information covered at that grade level for the entire year. • There is a close correlation to the CST results. • Coaching staff used these classroom profiles to help teachers to identify skills and concepts that teachers should use to meet the individual needs of their students.

26. Measuring Student Growth Sample EMA Classroom Profile

27. Measuring Student Growth

28. Measuring Student Growth

29. Contact Information Lisa Sandberg, NSMP Director Tehama County Department of Education 1135 Lincoln Street, Red Bluff, CA 96080 530.528.7388 lsandber@tehamaed.org