Iowa Core Mathematics Standards

1. Iowa Core Mathematics Standards Focusing on Fewer Topics and Learning More in Marshalltown

2. The Way It Used to Be • enVision Math implemented K-6 four years ago (from a very old, unaligned Investigations curriculum). • Previous standards were organized in parallel strands not emphasizing relationships between topics that occur in different strands; random, disconnected pieces of math that were hard for our students to learn. • Coverage and spiraling back—a lesson a day, moving on whether students understood or not; spiraling back to fix failed learning experiences; nothing mastered to apply/support upper grade level learning. • Randomly deleting topics to create Pacing Guides. • We were functioning as grade level islands. • Acceptable grade level growth year to year.

3. The Way It Is Now • IC Standards organized into groups of related standards called “domains.” Students experience the elegance of learning math by making logical connections between mathematical ideas within and across grade levels. • Focus on IC critical areas and teaching for meaning: In K-6, 314 lessons out of 960 (33%) realigned; more time to teach less; spiraling forward foundations of mastered knowledge to connect to/support learning upper grade level math. • Aligning enVision Math into IC Standards versus aligning IC Standards into enVision Math. • Interdependence among grade levels: Teachers no longer think of students as “my students” just for their school year; students in every grade are “our students;” teachers own learning in every grade level. • Pilot year growth in grade 5 was almost 6%.

4. 5th and 6th Grade Data After Four Years • Feb., 2013 IA Math: 6th grade showed 56% proficiency; they did not make their growth goal. • Feb., 2013 IA Math: 5th grade showed 68% proficiency, but they did make their growth goal (almost 6% growth). • Fifth and sixth grade teachers suggested that we were covering too much content too fast, moving on before students had a chance to master anything.

5. The Problem Is Clearly Defined • Elementary Math Leadership Team (1 teacher from every grade level; 1 teacher from every building, K-6). • Data discussions across the grades indicated that as students progressed scores were declining.

6. Our Vision Reading the book Focus by Mike Schmoker leads us to our vision: • Prioritize standards to identify the most important learning (focus and mastery). • Align enVision Math lessons to prioritized standards (focus and coherence). • Realign lessons for which there are no standards (focus). • Identify and assess mastery content to support students’ learning of upper grade-level math (coherence and mastery).

7. Piloting Our Vision in 5th Grade • Used our old standards--parallel strands. (prioritization, 5th, 2012-13) • Summer, 2012, for the first time we aligned enVision Math into the standards, rather than how we had done past alignments, aligning the standards into enVision Math. • Realigned 49 lessons out of 140 (35%). • Identified 45 mastery skills (enVision Scope and Sequence). • 5th grade showed almost 6% growth on Feb., 2013 IA Math tests. • The success of the pilot along with the 2014-2015 IC deadline directed our summer, 2013 work.

8. Our Process, Our Product Our Process: • Prioritize IC Standards. • Align enVision Math lessons into prioritized standards; 65%-85% of time spent in IC critical areas. • Realign lessons for which there are no standards (focus). • Identify and assess mastery content (coherence and mastery). The Products: 1. Prioritized Standards (handout) 2. Alignment Guides Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 5 Pacing Guides Kindergarten 2012-13 Kindergarten 2013-14 Grade 1 2012-13 3. Realigned Content Tables (transition) Grade 1 4. Mastery Content Tables Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 5

9. An Iowa Core Learning Moment

10. Areas of Weakness • enVision Math core lesson components: 1) IC rigor balance: conceptual learning is weak; procedural fluency is excessive. 2) Opportunities for students to deeply experience reading, writing, and talking about math. • enVision Math content alignment: number lines, measurement, fractions • enVision Math assessments: rigor

11. What We Learned • FOLLOW THE CORE: Letting go of content is never easy, but if there is not an IC Standard to support a lesson, realign it; if there is an IC Standard to support a lesson, leave it in (paperclips). • Close read and reread and reread the standards to be certain you understand what the standards are telling you to do. • Careful alignment involves technical, detailed, hard work and TIME (underestimates). • Look to your core curriculum first for materials to modify/supplement lessons; it is often there outside the core lesson. • Discovering the IC Progressions of Content was our most exciting moment (measurement). • Discovering Jason Zimba and the IC Design Principles was our second most exciting moment. • Even when in doubt, FOLLOW THE CORE (paperclips again) .

12. What Would We Do Differently Next Time? • Skim CCSS & ICSS websites; understand the IC Design Principles. • Read the Progressions first. • Use the word “realigned;” don’t use “skipped” or “deleted.” • K-4 first year, then 5th and 6th (transitional content, time). • Don’t just give a veteran teacher the standards to prioritize and align (reading technically, parting with content, teacher biases); work together with grade level veteran teachers instead.

13. Iowa Core Resources • Focus by Mike Schmoker. • How the Brain Learns Mathematics by David A. Sousa • www.corestandards.org (Common Core Standards) • https://www.educateiowa.gov/iowacore (Iowa Common Core) • http://ime.math.arizona.edu/progressions/ (Progressions of Content) • http://www.illustrativemathematics.org/ (Illustrative Mathematics) • http://www.smarterbalanced.org/k-12-education/common-core-state-standards-tools-resources/ (IC Design Principles Video with Jason Zimba) • http://www.corestandards.org/resources (“K-8 Publisher’s Criteria for the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics”) • http://www.achievethecore.org/content/upload/Focus_in_Math_06.12.2013.pdf (“Content Emphases by Cluster K-8,” both consortia have designated clusters at each grade level as major, supporting, or additional)