Introduction
The second half of the Superintendent’s Elementary Math Discussion Forum was held on February 26, 2018. The event was less well attended than the first meeting, with about 40 parents, teachers and staff in attendance. The format for the meeting was a continuation of the Design Thinking format, this time with participants grouped at tables of 8 to 10 within the District Office Governing Board room, each table a mix of parents, teachers and administrators. The official minutes taken by district staff may be viewed in their entirety here:
Elementary Math Discussion Forum Meeting 2-minutes
The Superintendent reviewed the goal and achievements of the first meeting, and then summarized what she thought were the major themes that emerged on January 23, 2018. She then asked the individuals at each table to as a group define and identify the top two problems in elementary math instruction, based on the summary and ideas from the first meeting. The top two issues from each table which were then presented to the entire room:
- There are limited opportunities for advancement for students who master grade-level concepts in mathematics.
- There is a disconnect between teacher satisfaction and parent satisfaction with the Everyday Mathematics (EM) curriculum, which brings up a difference in the definition of what constitutes quality math instruction.
- Differentiating within the classroom as prescribed by EM alone does not ensure that the students attain both computational fluency and conceptual understanding.
- Differentiation and acceleration materials need to be delivered across classrooms consistently, not left to each teacher to figure out on his/her own.
- It is a challenge to address varying ability levels, from those struggling to those beyond grade level, in heterogeneous classrooms.
- There exists a low level of parent confidence and/or trust with the district’s math instructional program in the current environment.
- The district has students of many different abilities and interests and we need to use their classroom instructional time effectively.
- Heterogeneous grouping is ineffective for students of different ability levels in math, and homogeneous grouping would better utilize instructional time.
- Parents are solving or trying to solve differentiation on their own — it is not supported by the school. Students aren’t prepared for STEM success — acceleration is needed.
- There is a concern that the social emotional developmental needs of students and their long term math education aren’t understood.
Note that several of the issues overlap. This was allowed given the Superintendent’s instructions to each table.
Continuation of Brainstorming Phase:
The Superintendent then asked all participants to brainstorm possible solutions to the issues identified in the previous phase. The following ideas were identified in the district’s official minutes:
- EPGY
- Differentiated individualized instruction
- Students should be allowed to test out of planned classroom math instruction
- Acceleration should be allowed
- Kids thrive in the after-school Math Olympiad program, and its strengths should be included in the regular classroom instruction
- Math Academy should be considered as a model for reaching advanced math students
- Parent involvement
- Kids of similar talent should be brought together
- Use the Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) model, and provide a math-focused pull out during the school day
- Cross-grade homogeneous grouping in upper elementary
- Provide middle school math instruction at elementary for those students capable
- Homogeneous groupings should be done in math only
- Math intervention in elementary like there exists for English Language Arts (ELA)
- Do not prohibit presenting advanced material to students as is the current practice
- Provide more frequent, optional parent/teacher conferences than once a year
- Allow better parent observation of math instruction time
- 4th-6th grade class sizes reduction to improve differentiation (20:1)
- Maintain/foster strong classroom community
- More opportunities for teachers to talk to parents
- Offer parents a choice with math tracks like at high school with college prep and advanced college prep
- Offer parents two different math tracks: traditional and integrated
- Use a math workshop model, flexible per unit
- Use the Mathzilla model: build excitement opportunities for math fun
- Require conceptual understanding and computational fluency
- Identify supplemental math resources and use them consistently
- Mathzilla and Math Olympiad questions peppered into the regular curriculum
- Consider evaluation and assessment measures beyond just CAASPP
The above ideas are discussed in greater depth on the following LCMP page:
Superintendent’s Review 2017-18 – Proposed Solutions
Follow-On Parent Committee:
The Superintendent closed out the forum by announcing that an Elementary Math Parent Committee would be formed to meet several times in March and April to decide on next actions and make recommendations. Under her previously announced plan, the Superintendent will presumably present the recommendations of the committee to the LCUSD Governing Board in a final report at a meeting during the summer. The Superintendent invited all parents in attendance to complete an application if interested in being selected for the committee. A copy of the parent committee application is below: