CSU-MTEP New Mathematics Standards for K-12 and College Learning

1. CSU-MTEPNew Mathematics Standards for K-12 and College Learning Margaret L. Kidd CSU Fullerton October 2014

2. MTE-Partnership • is comprised of 38 teams across 30 states -- including 68 universities, 87 school systems, 9 community colleges, and other interested institutions -- working collaboratively to redesign secondary mathematics teacher preparation programs. • provides a coordinated research, development, and implementation effort for secondary mathematics teacher preparation programs in order to meet the challenges of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and to embody research and best practices in the field.

3. Goal • to transform the preparation of secondary mathematics teachers to ensure teacher candidates can promote mathematical excellence in their future students, leading to college and career readiness as described in the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M) and other documents. • an initiative of APLU (Association of Public and Land Grant Universities) • SMTI (Science & Mathematics Teacher Imperative) • national effort to assist public universities to increase the number and improve the quality and diversity of science and mathematics teachers they prepare • Initial planning and organization began in October 2011

4. The Partnership endeavors to: • Build a national consensus on guiding principles for the preparation of mathematics teachers; • Promote partnerships among all sectors throughout the teacher development process; • Develop and coordinate a networked research and development agenda; • Serve as a clearinghouse for model programs and practices; and • Advocate for change at university, state and national levels. 

5. GuidingPrinciples • Building a national consensus on what effective secondary mathematics teacher preparation programs need to do in order to develop teacher candidates who promote mathematical excellence in their future students; • Enhancing communication among the partners involved in a secondary mathematics teacher preparation program in order to clarify program goals, to assess the effectiveness of the program, and to guide program development and revision; • Serving as the framework for an emerging national research and development agenda related to secondary teacher mathematics preparation; and • Helping to organize the identification, development, and dissemination of resources supporting effective secondary mathematics teacher preparation programs.

6. Partnerships • Guiding Principle1 Partnerships astheFoundation • Guiding Principle 2 Commitments by Institutions of Higher Education • Guiding Principle 3 • Commitments by School Districts and Schools

7. Teacher Candidate Knowledge and Skills • Guiding Principle4 Candidates’ KnowledgeandUseof Mathematics • Guiding Principle 5 Candidates’ Knowledge and Use of Educational Practices • Guiding Principle 6 Clinical Experiences

8. Support Structures • Guiding Principle 7 Student Recruitment, Selection, and Support • Guiding Principle 8 Beginning and Inservice Teacher Support • Guiding Principle 9 Tracking Success

9. CSU Participation • Joined national MTE-P and held first meeting June 23, 2014 • Includes all 22 CSU campuses who offer credential programs • Two day conference on Carnegie Model tomorrow • Professor directed with Fullerton as lead institution • Support from CO, MSTI and Bechtel

10. Based on Documents that Affect Change in CSU Mathematics Departments • CaCCSS-M • California Common Core State Standards • Content Standards • Standards for Mathematical Practice • MET II • The Mathematical Education of Teachers II • Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences • AMS

11. CaCCSS-M • Adopted 2010 as official state standards • Implemented K-12 in 2014-15 • Two paths for high school curriculum • No longer procedural • SBAC Testing • Practice Test • Performance Assessment • https://sat2.sbacpt.tds.airast.org/Student/Pages/LoginShell.aspx?client=SBAC_PT

12. Standards for Mathematical Practice 1 Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2 Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3 Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. 4 Model with mathematics. 5 Use appropriate tools strategically. 6 Attend to precision. 7 Look for and make use of structure. 8 Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.

13. Different Way of Learning and Different Way of Teaching • Teachers will now have to teach for understanding –that has not been the case • “There is a difference in knowing how to do something and being able to explain it”

14. The Specific Recommendations in MET II • Recommendation 1. Prospective teachers need mathematics courses that develop a solid understanding of the mathematics they will teach; • Recommendation 2. Coursework that allows time to engage in reasoning, explaining, and makingsense of the mathematics that prospective teachers will teach is needed to produce well-started beginning teachers;

15. The Specific recommendations in MET II: • Recommendation 4. All courses and professional development experiences for mathematics teachers should develop the habits of mind of a mathematical thinker and problem-solver, such as reasoning and explaining, modeling, seeing structure, and generalizing. Courses should also use the flexible, interactive styles of teaching that will enable teachers to develop these habits of mind in their students (CBMS, 2012, pp. 18 – 19). • Recommendation 3. Throughout their careers, teachers need opportunities for continued professional growth in their mathematical knowledge;

16. Websites • CSU-MTEP • XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX • MTE-P • www.aplu.org/mtep • CaCCSS • http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/ccssmathstandardaug2013.pdf • SBAC • http://www.smarterbalanced.org/ • MET II • http://cbmsweb.org/MET2/

17. Questions Thank you! Are there any questions?