K 8 Math Adoption

1
K 8 Math Adoption

• Forsyth County Schools
• 2007

2
Math Adoption CommitteeElementary

• Amy Agramonte, Sharon
• Elizabeth Bickford, Silver City
• Cindy Brown, Sawnee Primary
• Tiffany Brown, Settles Bridge
• Nancy Claxton, Chattahoochee
• Laura Edwards, Vickery Creek
• Curtis Fields, Shiloh Point
• Mary Helvey, Coal Mountain
• Lisa Hills, Chattahoochee
• Jessica Jetton, Daves Creek
• Mitzi McBride, Cumming
• Sheryl McDade, Mashburn
• Corinne Melton, Chestatee
• Billi Merk, Mashburn

• Lauren Misrahi, Vickery Creek
• Diane Namowicz, Shiloh Point
• Sharon Pinion, Sawnee Elementary
• Donna Price, Daves Creek
• Myra Reidy, Vickery Creek
• Anna Reitz, Big Creek
• Cheryl Riddle, Special Education (Central Office)
• Kimberly Sampson, Daves Creek
• Carla Sisk, Midway
• Darlene Storey, Silver City
• Valerie Auber, parent
• Rene Westray, Matt

3
Math Adoption CommitteeMiddle School

• Jennifer Campbell, Liberty
• Patricia Ezell, Vickery Creek
• Mark Fisher, Otwell
• Gretchen Franklin, NFMS
• Wendy Hall, Riverwatch
• Tara Hawkins, Riverwatch
• Tracey Heffelfinger, Liberty

• Lorri Lazenby, NFMS
• Kolleen Metarko, SFMS
• Kent Newton, Vickery Creek
• Terri North, Riverwatch
• Amy Poulson, Otwell
• Connie Stovall, NFMS
• Tina Nissan, parent
• Elizabeth Watterson, SFMS
• Phil West, SFMS

4
Activities

• September - December
• Received overview and background behind the
  development and intent of the GPS from Georgia
  Math Director, Claire Pierce (DOE)
• Analyzed GPS using the Rick Stiggins model for
  decomposing standards (Knowledge, Skills,
  Reasoning, Disposition, Performance)
• Analyzed ALL of the textbook programs approved by
  the Georgia Department of Education Textbook
  Review Committee for GPS coverage
• Eliminated textbook programs which did not
  address the GPS as needed
• January February
• Used PRISM Criteria to evaluate programs
• Eliminated programs that did not meet PRISM
  criteria
• Heard presentation from Dr. Paul Ohme, Director
  of CEISMC at Georgia Tech on the Economics of
  Educational Reform
• Heard presentations from each of the program
  publishers
• Put all programs on display at schools to receive
  parent and teacher feedback
• March
• Worked collaboratively on a state math TASK,
  analyzing the qualities of a good task and
  standards-based teaching needed.
• Studied chapters 2 and 3 of the Van de Walle
  book, Teaching Mathematics in Elementary and
  Middle School, 5th edition.
• Reviewed feedback received from parents,
  teachers, administrators and other school
  personnel. Took notes on comments about
  individual programs (strengths and weaknesses
  concerns and commendations).
• Individual committee members completed their own
  adoption feedback form, providing their
  professional opinion about which program should
  be recommended for adoption.
• Future Plans

5
Activities

• September - December
• Received overview and background behind the
  development and intent of the GPS from Georgia
  Math Director, Claire Pierce (DOE)
• Surveyed community about their expectations in a
  math program
• Analyzed GPS using the Rick Stiggins model for
  decomposing standards (Knowledge, Skills,
  Reasoning, Disposition, Performance)
• Analyzed ALL of the textbook programs approved by
  the Georgia Department of Education Textbook
  Review Committee for GPS coverage
• Eliminated textbook programs which did not
  address the GPS as needed

6
Activities

• January February
• Used PRISM Criteria to evaluate programs
• Eliminated programs that did not meet PRISM
  criteria
• Heard presentation from Dr. Paul Ohme, Director
  of CEISMC at Georgia Tech on the Economics of
  Educational Reform
• Heard presentations from each of the program
  publishers
• Put all programs on display at schools to receive
  parent and teacher feedback (advertised through
  district website, school websites and
  newsletters)
• Collected a tremendous amount of feedback from
  parents and non-adoption committee teachers

7
Activities

• March
• Worked collaboratively on a state math TASK,
  analyzing the qualities of a good task and
  standards-based teaching needed.
• Studied chapters 2 and 3 of the John Van de Walle
  book, Teaching Mathematics in Elementary and
  Middle School, 5th edition.
• Reviewed the tremendous amount of feedback
  received from parents, teachers, administrators
  and other school personnel. Took notes on
  comments about individual programs (strengths and
  weaknesses concerns and commendations).
• Individual committee members completed their own
  adoption feedback form, providing their
  professional opinion about which program should
  be recommended for adoption. Their votes were
  derived from how they represented the teachers in
  their building as well as community input as well
  as their own knowledge.

8
Activities

• Future Plans
• Professional Learning
• Technology Planning
• Curriculum Mapping
• Communication (external and internal)

9
Decisions

• Elementary School
• Elementary recommends Houghton Miflin
• Strengths include
• Strong alignment with GPS, CRCT
• Student, parent friendly textbook
• Good differentiation support
• Strong skills and review segments embedded by
  unit
• Vocabulary
• Assessment components
• Solid foundation
• Easy to use
• Focused on mastery of basic computation
• Allows the teacher to move around the text
• Teacher friendly

10
Decisions

• Middle School
• Recommends Holt Mathematics
• Strengths noted by the committee members include
• Covers GPS Standards
• Great blend of traditional and
  investigative/exploratory
• Awesome website and technology resources
• Multi-level approaches and discovery based
  resources are superior
• Internet based resources and PC based all linked
• Standards for Georgia are in a logical order
• Offers the opportunity for deeper understanding
  through discovery and drill and practice
• Has the ease of use for students, teachers, and
  parents
• It contains great self-assessment pieces.
• It is student and parent friendly.
• Its blending of materials and extensive resource
  library that will enable teachers to teach in a
  blended way and balance of constructivist
  teaching and more formalized mathematics
  teaching.
• It provides more differentiation, more examples,
  more connections to the GPS

11
Implications for Future

• TransitionVirtually Seamless
• Curriculum Maps
• Professional Training
• Intuitive Programs
• No gaps found
• Alignment with Report Card
• Alignment with other Forsyth County initiatives
• Professional learning--Begins Summer 2007
• Materials and GPS Alignment
• Technology
• Conceptual Foundations
• Administrative support
• Differentiation
• Assessment FOR and OF Learning
• CommunicationTeachers and Parents

12
Projected CostElementary

• Kindergarten 66,015 (163)
• First Grade 96,744 (148)
• Second Grade 91,412 (140)
• Third Grade 162,813 (140)
• Fourth Grade 138, 703 (100.4)
• Fifth Grade 137,183 (99)
• Total Projected Cost 692,869

13
Projected CostMiddle School

• Sixth Grade 117,977.65
• Seventh Grade 124,241.95
• Eighth Grade 122,868.20
• Total Projected Cost 365, 087.80
• Projected Total Textbook Adoption Cost (K 8)
  1,057,956.80

14
Gary Tsuruda
Ultimately, however, mathematics reform does not
take place in specific curriculum materials,
research papers, textbooks, or administrative
offices it takes place in classrooms.