Friday, July 16, 2010
Videos from last night's ACSC decisions posted
Videos of the final hours of the ACSC deliberations including the final votes on the K-7 and HS math standards have been posted on the CMC website at http://www.cmc-math.org/news/commoncore.html
Final ACSC descision
Here is an excellent report on the ACSC final decision yesterday by John Fensterwald.
http://educatedguess.org/2010/07/16/common-core-with-8th-grade-algebra-endorsed/
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Approved!
New standards are approved and it looks like they will be approved by the SBE on August 2
Thanks to everyone who contributed to getting this work complete. Now onto the Framework. Our work is never done!
Thanks to everyone who contributed to getting this work complete. Now onto the Framework. Our work is never done!
ACSC proceedings July 15
Submitted by Gretchen Muller
8:15 AM ELA passed.
20 minute break to review math documents before any further discussion.
8:45 AM
Bruce Grip – Doesn't want to loose the ability to have integrated courses in the high school.
Scott Farrand and Heather Calahan presented a revised version of their plan.
These are the Algebra 1 standards whether they are in 8th grade or not. This is what all students need to know after completing.
Scott Hill – public statement. Heard that there was general agreement about what constitutes 8th grade standards. Adopt an 8th grade standards package and let the SBE define through the framework what would be 8th grade and what would be Algebra.
Heather Calahan – trying to work out a compromise. Yesterday, tried to present a starting place for conversation. What we put forth yesterday was not meant to be perfect and a final product. Right now want to look at 8 CA standards that we feel need input from the commission. Discussion has been limited to 5 minutes per item.
10:10 AM Discussion about the standards of mathematical practice.
10:15 AM Discussion began on considering the SCOE additional 15% considerations at grade 2.
11:35 AM break (done with 3rd except one standard that needed language added)
11:45 AM Continue discussion on 4th grade CCSS
12:45 PM Break for lunch
1:15 PM Public comment by Gretchen Muller regarding that our current state standards are based on information and research that is 15 years old and that since then we have learned a lot more about international comparisons and how children learn. The CCSS have taken this new information into account and she would hope that the commission would take that into account. While CA standards may have been world class when they were designed, a lot has changed. Also the job of how we educate our children does not stop with the standards. The process continues with the development of the framework. The standards tell us what and the framework tells us how. A lot more detail can go into the framework that addresses the concerns you have as well has giving guidance to publishers to develop the instructional materials. The framework committee will have people just as passionate and committed as you with many opportunities for input and more time than you have been given to look at these standards.
continue discussion on 4th grade CCSS
Commissioners are getting frustrated by the tedious process of examining each of Wurman's suggestions, many of which would change the intent of the CCSS.
1:30 PM finished with grade 4, finished the 3rd grade, begin discussion of 5th grade.
2:00 PM Scott Farrand proposed that in order to speed things up, that we go through the SCOE document and only address those proposed changes as they are most important.
Motion passes.
Public comment – Kathy Geither: Does the SCOE document alone adequately prepare students for Algebra in 8th grade? SCOE said yes.
2:15 PM discussion on 8th grade Algebra begins.
3:25 PM break
3:39 PM discussion of 7th grade standards, moving some of the 8th grade CCSS standards to 7th grade
4:10 PM Public comment Mary Alicia McCray spoke to repeated standards and the difficulty assessing repeated standards. Teach to mastery at the grade level.
Discussion about moving 7th grade standards to 6th. Discussion about interpretation of allowable moving CCSS standards "cut and paste" vs "copy and paste". Copy and paste interpretation won.
4:50 PM Pat Sabo moved to approve the 8th grade CCSS as written.
Kathy Geither adopt a comprehensive mathematics package and not just an 8th grade.
Scott Farrand made an amended motion to include the 8th grade CCSS and the 8th grade Alg package.
Motions passed.
5:30 - 8 pm Not Present at the meeting. continued discussion on 5-7 standards and began discussion on HS standards. Decision to continue working until midnight at the latest. Discussion on HS standards postponed.
8 PM – Chuck Weis moved to adopt the K-7 standards as amended. Scott Farrand congratulated the commission on getting to this point. Both Bill Evers and Ze'ev Wurman are against the proposal. They don't think it is good enough.
Public comment by Pat Rucker CTA is concerned that a two track system has been created in grade 8 and about to approve K-7 standards that will feed into that tracking system.
Motion passed.
8:30 Chuck Weis moved to adopt the ELA introductory documents. Bill Evers is opposed as he thinks it is not part of the standards and out of their perview.
Several people are speaking in favor of adopting as this is the only document in the ELA portion of CCSS that mentions English Learners.
8:48 Scott Farrand issue before the house is HS math. He would like to use the document he and Heather put together.
9:05 discussion started on HS standards. This has been limited to 75 minutes. Tempers are starting to flare.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Blog entry from Educated Guess
> Educated Guess
> www.educatedguess.org
>
> Quest for compromise on common core
> In a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger that it disseminated in the days leading to a critical vote, an influential group of K-12 and university educators, researchers and policymakers has urged the adoption of the Common Core standards in English language arts and math.
>
> "We believe that the Common Core Standards represent the next crucial step in ensuring California's education system once again leads the way in quality and rigor," Jennifer O'Day wrote on behalf of the California Collaborative on District Reform.
>
>
> Members of the collaborative include former Deputy State Superintendent Rick Miller; Arun Ramanathan, executive director of Education Trust-West; Fresno Unified Supt. Michael Hanson; Holly Jacobson, assistant executive director of the California School Boards Assn.; Ellen Moir, CEO of the New Teacher Center in Santa Cruz; and several noted researchers and foundation leaders. O'Day is a research scientist with the American Institutes for Research.
>
> By tomorrow afternoon, it will become clearer whether the state is going to adopt common core standards as the guideposts for a new curriculum, textbook revisions and future assessments. The 21-member California State Content Standards Commission must decide whether to recommend the national standards intact or with changes to the State Board of Education. This morning, the commission is expected to pass the English language arts standards with some additions incorporating California's current standards.
>
> From there, it's anyone guess. In California, debate on math standards always comes around to Algebra I – whether it should be taught to all students in eighth grade, as Gov. Schwarzenegger and the State Board of Education advocate. Common core standards permit this, but don't push it; instead, strands of algebra would be taught from sixth through ninth grades.
>
> Some commissioners, led by Bill Evers of the Hoover Institution and Ze'ev Wurman, a software engineer from Palo Alto, will likely call for incorporating the state's algebra standards into common core eighth grade standards, while some of the practicing teachers on the commission, frustrated with pushing algebra on students who aren't ready for it, will likely argue to leave common core intact, with between a half and two-thirds of algebra taught after eighth grade.
>
> Both sides will argue that rigor, like God, is on their side.
>
> In her letter, O'Day of the California Collaborative on District Reform states the case for common-core adoption:
>
> "The Common Core Standards are as rigorous as California's current standards. By starting with anchor standards rooted in what it takes to be college- and career-ready and then linking the standards across all grades back to that outcome, the Common Core maintains the rigorous expectations of California's current standards and accountability system."
> "The Common Core Standards in mathematics provide clear steps across the grades to prepare students for success in algebra, a gateway course for both college and career."
> "The Common Core would strengthen our ability to ensure that all California students have equitable access to a rigorous college- and career-ready curriculum."
> Focus on 15 percent changes
>
> The sponsors of common core – the National Governors Assn. and the Council of Chief
> State School Officers – are allowing states to supplement common core with up to 15 percent additional standards, although measuring what constitutes that number is imprecise.
>
> The Collaborative on District Reform urges the standards commission to refrain from big changes: "We urge the state to keep any expansion of the Common Core to a minimum so that the Common Core in California will in fact allow deeper exploration of fewer content strands."
>
> Rather than get bogged down in intricate wording changes, the collaborative recommends a two-step process: Adopt common core now and then return at a later date to augment the standards.
>
> But that's not likely to happen, because the Standards Commission goes out of business after Thursday, and the State Board, which is to meet on Aug. 2 to vote common core, with changes, up or down, has no authority to alter what the Standards Commission recommends.
>
> The word I hear is that members of the commission have been working frantically to draft extensive revisions to common core centering on Algebra I, while not messing too much with K-6 common core math standards – an acknowledgment that they're pretty good.
>
> I also hear there's a strong behind-the-scenes effort to compromise.
>
> Perhaps sensing they may not have a majority, Schwarzenegger's folks may be backing off universal Algebra in eighth grade, while still making it a long-term goal. There would be an intact algebra course in eighth grade for the majority of students; currently about 60 percent take it either in seventh or eighth grade, although many repeat it in ninth grade. Shifting some common-core seventh and eighth grade standards down a grade in theory would prepare even more California students to take algebra by eighth grade.
>
> At least that's one option of many. If last week's meetings were a prelude, the next two days' votes will be confusing, and discussions will be difficult. If common core's defenders go toe to toe with Evers, who can be abrupt and imperious, the debate should be interesting, if not tense.
>
> Catch it if you can here.BLOG
>
> www.educatedguess.org
>
> Quest for compromise on common core
> In a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger that it disseminated in the days leading to a critical vote, an influential group of K-12 and university educators, researchers and policymakers has urged the adoption of the Common Core standards in English language arts and math.
>
> "We believe that the Common Core Standards represent the next crucial step in ensuring California's education system once again leads the way in quality and rigor," Jennifer O'Day wrote on behalf of the California Collaborative on District Reform.
>
>
> Members of the collaborative include former Deputy State Superintendent Rick Miller; Arun Ramanathan, executive director of Education Trust-West; Fresno Unified Supt. Michael Hanson; Holly Jacobson, assistant executive director of the California School Boards Assn.; Ellen Moir, CEO of the New Teacher Center in Santa Cruz; and several noted researchers and foundation leaders. O'Day is a research scientist with the American Institutes for Research.
>
> By tomorrow afternoon, it will become clearer whether the state is going to adopt common core standards as the guideposts for a new curriculum, textbook revisions and future assessments. The 21-member California State Content Standards Commission must decide whether to recommend the national standards intact or with changes to the State Board of Education. This morning, the commission is expected to pass the English language arts standards with some additions incorporating California's current standards.
>
> From there, it's anyone guess. In California, debate on math standards always comes around to Algebra I – whether it should be taught to all students in eighth grade, as Gov. Schwarzenegger and the State Board of Education advocate. Common core standards permit this, but don't push it; instead, strands of algebra would be taught from sixth through ninth grades.
>
> Some commissioners, led by Bill Evers of the Hoover Institution and Ze'ev Wurman, a software engineer from Palo Alto, will likely call for incorporating the state's algebra standards into common core eighth grade standards, while some of the practicing teachers on the commission, frustrated with pushing algebra on students who aren't ready for it, will likely argue to leave common core intact, with between a half and two-thirds of algebra taught after eighth grade.
>
> Both sides will argue that rigor, like God, is on their side.
>
> In her letter, O'Day of the California Collaborative on District Reform states the case for common-core adoption:
>
> "The Common Core Standards are as rigorous as California's current standards. By starting with anchor standards rooted in what it takes to be college- and career-ready and then linking the standards across all grades back to that outcome, the Common Core maintains the rigorous expectations of California's current standards and accountability system."
> "The Common Core Standards in mathematics provide clear steps across the grades to prepare students for success in algebra, a gateway course for both college and career."
> "The Common Core would strengthen our ability to ensure that all California students have equitable access to a rigorous college- and career-ready curriculum."
> Focus on 15 percent changes
>
> The sponsors of common core – the National Governors Assn. and the Council of Chief
> State School Officers – are allowing states to supplement common core with up to 15 percent additional standards, although measuring what constitutes that number is imprecise.
>
> The Collaborative on District Reform urges the standards commission to refrain from big changes: "We urge the state to keep any expansion of the Common Core to a minimum so that the Common Core in California will in fact allow deeper exploration of fewer content strands."
>
> Rather than get bogged down in intricate wording changes, the collaborative recommends a two-step process: Adopt common core now and then return at a later date to augment the standards.
>
> But that's not likely to happen, because the Standards Commission goes out of business after Thursday, and the State Board, which is to meet on Aug. 2 to vote common core, with changes, up or down, has no authority to alter what the Standards Commission recommends.
>
> The word I hear is that members of the commission have been working frantically to draft extensive revisions to common core centering on Algebra I, while not messing too much with K-6 common core math standards – an acknowledgment that they're pretty good.
>
> I also hear there's a strong behind-the-scenes effort to compromise.
>
> Perhaps sensing they may not have a majority, Schwarzenegger's folks may be backing off universal Algebra in eighth grade, while still making it a long-term goal. There would be an intact algebra course in eighth grade for the majority of students; currently about 60 percent take it either in seventh or eighth grade, although many repeat it in ninth grade. Shifting some common-core seventh and eighth grade standards down a grade in theory would prepare even more California students to take algebra by eighth grade.
>
> At least that's one option of many. If last week's meetings were a prelude, the next two days' votes will be confusing, and discussions will be difficult. If common core's defenders go toe to toe with Evers, who can be abrupt and imperious, the debate should be interesting, if not tense.
>
> Catch it if you can here.
>
> www.educatedguess.org
>
> Quest for compromise on common core
> In a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger that it disseminated in the days leading to a critical vote, an influential group of K-12 and university educators, researchers and policymakers has urged the adoption of the Common Core standards in English language arts and math.
>
> "We believe that the Common Core Standards represent the next crucial step in ensuring California's education system once again leads the way in quality and rigor," Jennifer O'Day wrote on behalf of the California Collaborative on District Reform.
>
>
> Members of the collaborative include former Deputy State Superintendent Rick Miller; Arun Ramanathan, executive director of Education Trust-West; Fresno Unified Supt. Michael Hanson; Holly Jacobson, assistant executive director of the California School Boards Assn.; Ellen Moir, CEO of the New Teacher Center in Santa Cruz; and several noted researchers and foundation leaders. O'Day is a research scientist with the American Institutes for Research.
>
> By tomorrow afternoon, it will become clearer whether the state is going to adopt common core standards as the guideposts for a new curriculum, textbook revisions and future assessments. The 21-member California State Content Standards Commission must decide whether to recommend the national standards intact or with changes to the State Board of Education. This morning, the commission is expected to pass the English language arts standards with some additions incorporating California's current standards.
>
> From there, it's anyone guess. In California, debate on math standards always comes around to Algebra I – whether it should be taught to all students in eighth grade, as Gov. Schwarzenegger and the State Board of Education advocate. Common core standards permit this, but don't push it; instead, strands of algebra would be taught from sixth through ninth grades.
>
> Some commissioners, led by Bill Evers of the Hoover Institution and Ze'ev Wurman, a software engineer from Palo Alto, will likely call for incorporating the state's algebra standards into common core eighth grade standards, while some of the practicing teachers on the commission, frustrated with pushing algebra on students who aren't ready for it, will likely argue to leave common core intact, with between a half and two-thirds of algebra taught after eighth grade.
>
> Both sides will argue that rigor, like God, is on their side.
>
> In her letter, O'Day of the California Collaborative on District Reform states the case for common-core adoption:
>
> "The Common Core Standards are as rigorous as California's current standards. By starting with anchor standards rooted in what it takes to be college- and career-ready and then linking the standards across all grades back to that outcome, the Common Core maintains the rigorous expectations of California's current standards and accountability system."
> "The Common Core Standards in mathematics provide clear steps across the grades to prepare students for success in algebra, a gateway course for both college and career."
> "The Common Core would strengthen our ability to ensure that all California students have equitable access to a rigorous college- and career-ready curriculum."
> Focus on 15 percent changes
>
> The sponsors of common core – the National Governors Assn. and the Council of Chief
> State School Officers – are allowing states to supplement common core with up to 15 percent additional standards, although measuring what constitutes that number is imprecise.
>
> The Collaborative on District Reform urges the standards commission to refrain from big changes: "We urge the state to keep any expansion of the Common Core to a minimum so that the Common Core in California will in fact allow deeper exploration of fewer content strands."
>
> Rather than get bogged down in intricate wording changes, the collaborative recommends a two-step process: Adopt common core now and then return at a later date to augment the standards.
>
> But that's not likely to happen, because the Standards Commission goes out of business after Thursday, and the State Board, which is to meet on Aug. 2 to vote common core, with changes, up or down, has no authority to alter what the Standards Commission recommends.
>
> The word I hear is that members of the commission have been working frantically to draft extensive revisions to common core centering on Algebra I, while not messing too much with K-6 common core math standards – an acknowledgment that they're pretty good.
>
> I also hear there's a strong behind-the-scenes effort to compromise.
>
> Perhaps sensing they may not have a majority, Schwarzenegger's folks may be backing off universal Algebra in eighth grade, while still making it a long-term goal. There would be an intact algebra course in eighth grade for the majority of students; currently about 60 percent take it either in seventh or eighth grade, although many repeat it in ninth grade. Shifting some common-core seventh and eighth grade standards down a grade in theory would prepare even more California students to take algebra by eighth grade.
>
> At least that's one option of many. If last week's meetings were a prelude, the next two days' votes will be confusing, and discussions will be difficult. If common core's defenders go toe to toe with Evers, who can be abrupt and imperious, the debate should be interesting, if not tense.
>
> Catch it if you can here.BLOG
>
> www.educatedguess.org
>
> Quest for compromise on common core
> In a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger that it disseminated in the days leading to a critical vote, an influential group of K-12 and university educators, researchers and policymakers has urged the adoption of the Common Core standards in English language arts and math.
>
> "We believe that the Common Core Standards represent the next crucial step in ensuring California's education system once again leads the way in quality and rigor," Jennifer O'Day wrote on behalf of the California Collaborative on District Reform.
>
>
> Members of the collaborative include former Deputy State Superintendent Rick Miller; Arun Ramanathan, executive director of Education Trust-West; Fresno Unified Supt. Michael Hanson; Holly Jacobson, assistant executive director of the California School Boards Assn.; Ellen Moir, CEO of the New Teacher Center in Santa Cruz; and several noted researchers and foundation leaders. O'Day is a research scientist with the American Institutes for Research.
>
> By tomorrow afternoon, it will become clearer whether the state is going to adopt common core standards as the guideposts for a new curriculum, textbook revisions and future assessments. The 21-member California State Content Standards Commission must decide whether to recommend the national standards intact or with changes to the State Board of Education. This morning, the commission is expected to pass the English language arts standards with some additions incorporating California's current standards.
>
> From there, it's anyone guess. In California, debate on math standards always comes around to Algebra I – whether it should be taught to all students in eighth grade, as Gov. Schwarzenegger and the State Board of Education advocate. Common core standards permit this, but don't push it; instead, strands of algebra would be taught from sixth through ninth grades.
>
> Some commissioners, led by Bill Evers of the Hoover Institution and Ze'ev Wurman, a software engineer from Palo Alto, will likely call for incorporating the state's algebra standards into common core eighth grade standards, while some of the practicing teachers on the commission, frustrated with pushing algebra on students who aren't ready for it, will likely argue to leave common core intact, with between a half and two-thirds of algebra taught after eighth grade.
>
> Both sides will argue that rigor, like God, is on their side.
>
> In her letter, O'Day of the California Collaborative on District Reform states the case for common-core adoption:
>
> "The Common Core Standards are as rigorous as California's current standards. By starting with anchor standards rooted in what it takes to be college- and career-ready and then linking the standards across all grades back to that outcome, the Common Core maintains the rigorous expectations of California's current standards and accountability system."
> "The Common Core Standards in mathematics provide clear steps across the grades to prepare students for success in algebra, a gateway course for both college and career."
> "The Common Core would strengthen our ability to ensure that all California students have equitable access to a rigorous college- and career-ready curriculum."
> Focus on 15 percent changes
>
> The sponsors of common core – the National Governors Assn. and the Council of Chief
> State School Officers – are allowing states to supplement common core with up to 15 percent additional standards, although measuring what constitutes that number is imprecise.
>
> The Collaborative on District Reform urges the standards commission to refrain from big changes: "We urge the state to keep any expansion of the Common Core to a minimum so that the Common Core in California will in fact allow deeper exploration of fewer content strands."
>
> Rather than get bogged down in intricate wording changes, the collaborative recommends a two-step process: Adopt common core now and then return at a later date to augment the standards.
>
> But that's not likely to happen, because the Standards Commission goes out of business after Thursday, and the State Board, which is to meet on Aug. 2 to vote common core, with changes, up or down, has no authority to alter what the Standards Commission recommends.
>
> The word I hear is that members of the commission have been working frantically to draft extensive revisions to common core centering on Algebra I, while not messing too much with K-6 common core math standards – an acknowledgment that they're pretty good.
>
> I also hear there's a strong behind-the-scenes effort to compromise.
>
> Perhaps sensing they may not have a majority, Schwarzenegger's folks may be backing off universal Algebra in eighth grade, while still making it a long-term goal. There would be an intact algebra course in eighth grade for the majority of students; currently about 60 percent take it either in seventh or eighth grade, although many repeat it in ninth grade. Shifting some common-core seventh and eighth grade standards down a grade in theory would prepare even more California students to take algebra by eighth grade.
>
> At least that's one option of many. If last week's meetings were a prelude, the next two days' votes will be confusing, and discussions will be difficult. If common core's defenders go toe to toe with Evers, who can be abrupt and imperious, the debate should be interesting, if not tense.
>
> Catch it if you can here.
>
ACSC Meetings July 14, 2010
submitted by Gretchen Muller
General observations:
The day started with introductions and after a quick removal of objections over adding rigor to the math criteria, discussion continued on the ELA standards until lunch. After lunch discussion started on math. It's obvious that Evers is using stalling tactics. Again the commission got bogged down on procedural issues that took up valuable time. At this point, unless something miraculous happens, it looks like neither the recommendation to adopt ELA or math standards will come through. The ELA are close but it depends on when the commission takes them up again – first thing in the morning or after the math discussion. The math discussion is very nit picky by Wurman. A lot of discussion about 8th grade Algebra course and how to prepare students. Concerns about the discussion of pathways could be interpreted at tracking. Some commissioners have brought up the issue that designing courses is not part of their charge. I did record audio from the math portion of the day and will work on posting that material later.
Greg Geeting went over the agenda for the day.
Pat Sabo spoke regarding the daunting task of analyzing the math standards. She urged the chair to allow all commissioners to speak before calling on others to speak multiple times.
Discussion regarding the adoption of a 5th criteria regarding rigor. Scott Farrand pointed out that part of their discussion regarding rigor pertained to an overall evaluation of the standards and not an item by item analysis.
The criteria used to analyze the math standards are as follows.
1. Substantively enhance
2. Address a perceived gap
3. Be defensible to classroom practitioners
4. The original standard remains intact
5. Ensure that the rigor of California's existing standards is maintained.
Commission continued discussion on the ELA standards and proposed changes. A lot of discussion on pronouns and recitation/memorization. Also a lot of discussion regarding dictionaries.
More discussion on the introduction and prefatory sections of the standards. Further discussion has been postponed to tomorrow so that the commissioners can have a chance to look over these sections.
Pat Rucker from CTA spoke in support of adoption of the CCSS.
After lunch, Pat Sabo made a motion to accept the CCSS standards 8 – K as written with a second pathway leading to 8th grade algebra with consideration of proposals that have been worked on.
Discussion on clarity of the motion. Motion seconded by Robert Ellis.
A substitute motion made by Evers, proposing that two common core pathways. One Algebra in 8th grade and another common core 8th grade that would involve more grades level paths than just 8th grade. Starts with the common core standards being part of the work that is being done.
1st vote on Algebra and the note on unprepared students being pushed into 8th grade. Part of this is looking at the proposals
2nd looking at K-5
3rd look at 6-7
4th look at HS courses
Discussion about whether or not HS course pathways are part of their charge.
Wurman seconded
Weiss – concerned that the motion is too complex for the commission to act on. Asks that the motion be removed.
Wurman asks that both motions be withdrawn.
Farrand argued against the substitute motion so that we can move as quickly as possible and move in favor the Sabo motion so that we can get to the business at hand.
Evers his motion proposes a process. Sabo's does not.
Sabo – would accept a friendly amendment to start with Algebra.
Freathy – supports Farrand
Evers withdraws motion, but includes unanimous consent to start with Algebra 1. Not withdrawn. Wurman objected.
Wurman – wants Sabo's motion withdrawn so that we can look at all of the documents without approving the CCSS first.
Weis – against the motion. Concerned that "pathways" means tracking.
Evers - If we don't have pathways, we can't have students taking Algebra in 8th grade. I think it's racist not to have pathways.
Farrand – frustrated that debate on the motion is not occurring and other issues are coming up. I move to close debate. Seconded.
Passed – no further debate on the substitute motion.
Evers requested a roll call vote.
Evers is using stalling tactics.
20 minutes spent on whether or not to do a roll call vote. Defeated (wurman and evers yeah)
Substitute motion – defeated (W-E only yeah)
Evers – I amend this motion to include algebra. Sabo accepted. Seconded by Ellis.
Kathy Gaitner – urged the commission to take other action than this motion.
Evers wants to change the motion to look at two pathways before algebra. Seconded by Ellis.
A lot of frustration expressed by the commissioners. Want to move on to the actual discussion.
Sabo – main motion and amendment withdrawn.
Sue Stickel – proposes that the two proposals be presented then discuss Algebra, then talk about how to proceed through the grade levels.
Scott Farrand presented his proposal. Talked to MDTP group, Achieve Pathways, Jason Zimba, Evers/Wurman proposals. Believes there should be algebra in the 8th grade. Each group had a problem in how to prepare students. Many of the 8th grade CCSS prepare students for Algebra. Sensitive to the problem and how tracking could be a result. Their proposal does not have two different 7th grade courses to differentiate students going into Algebra.
Needed 8th grade Algebra course to subsume some of the 8th grade CCSS. 5 standards would be moved to the 7th grade and still remain at the CCSS 8th grade.
Lori – there are less standards than the CA but that is not a bad thing. 7th grade teachers feel they have too much to cover. I think that adding the 5 standards into 7th grade would not impact the 7th grade CCSS.
Deborah Keys – Can you help me understand pedagogically where students can start to fall off the boat?
Farrand response – CCSS looked at the A+ countries and what they do. CCSS give students the foundation they need especially in number sense. Fractions are also a big area that can "doom" students. Students typically lack the understanding of what a fraction is.
Calahan – there is an unculturing of the curriculum and allows the students to focus on number sense in the early grades.
Grip – This proposal allows a student to take the K-7 courses then either take an 8th grade course or algebra.
Callahan – the 8th grade algebra course includes more of the modeling standards of the CCSS than many traditional Algebra courses and the 8th grade CCSS are incorporated so the 8th grade Algebra 1 course is more integrated.
Jim Lanich – 8th grade Algebra placement is a civil rights issue. This is a preparation challenge.
Evers – wants clarification on the number of standards.
Farrand – this is what we struggled with. Concerned about overpacking courses. Didn't want to have a tracking system in 8th grade.
Lengthy discussion about discrepancy between the larger number of standards that would constitute the 8th grade Algebra course and 7th grade.
Wurman raised an issue about how to assess all of the standards in the 8th grade Algebra course.
Calahan – a mathematically rich task can assess many standards.
Break
Sabo – she does not believe that it is the charge of this commission to make courses.
Wurman – presented his proposal
In grades K-5, a significant amount of content is missing from Common Core. Middle School – if I were to place an algebra course in grade 8, there would be a significant hump in grade 8 so he tried to spread the hump over grades 6-8. One path for all K-5 and then two paths to Algebra or PreAlgebra in 8th grade starting in 6th grade. Not happy with this because of two paths through HS, but is the best that he could come up with.
Evers asked Wurman – what if you just spread out the standards across the two grades (6th and 7th) and every student take the "upper track". He doesn't like the hump in Scott's 8th grade Algebra.
Calahan – We are giving more weight to the number of standards than we should. Illustrated that we do not teach standards as separate entities, but teach them as an integrated package.
Concern that this would track students starting in 6th grade.
Wurman – it's not tracking but laning.
Lori - Einstein doing the same thing but expecting the same results.
Wurman – is there a better way of doing it, and would one of these proposals be better than let's do it.
Bill Evers proposed notes to accompany the ACSC report to the SBE tomorrow.
The California State Academic Content Standards Commission recommends that the State Board of Education update the Academic Performance Index incentives so that taking Algebra 1 by grade 8 will continue to be encouraged, but pushing unprepared students into Algebra 1 by grade 8 will be discouraged. One possibility would be changing the state accountability from subtracting API points for students in 8th grade who are not in Algebra 1 to giving extra API points for having students who achieve scores of basic or above in Algebra 1 in 8th grade. A plan like this or something better that performs the same function is what we are recommending.
The Commission has acted throughout our deliberations on the understanding that the 2009 College and Career Readiness Standards by the CCSI have been superseded, have not been part of our deliberations, and are not part of our recommendations.
The Commission has acted throughout our deliberations on the understanding that the Common Core Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects are part of the Common Core standards that we are recommending to the SBE, that these technical-literacy standards apply to the reading and writing that would take place in history/social studies, science, and technical classrooms, and these standards are not meant to add responsibilities to the ELA teacher.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Handouts from July 6 and 7 ACSC posted
The math handouts and presentations not available on the ACSC page on the Sacramento County Office of Education website are now posted on the CMC website in the on the Common Core Standards page under News and Information. More handouts related to the ELA Common Core State Standards will be posted by Friday PM.
The handouts include the presentations by Drs. Wu and Milgram as well as the suggested changes to the math CCSS by Bill Evers.
The handouts include the presentations by Drs. Wu and Milgram as well as the suggested changes to the math CCSS by Bill Evers.
ACSC July 7 Public Comment
Good afternoon.
My name is Jim Burfeind. I am a member of the CMC and I teach 7th and 8th grade math at Ishi Hills Middle School in Oroville,CA. The community I work in is very poor economically, but the team of teachers I work with is strong and we have so far met all our AYP and API goals and have stayed out of PI.
I am really excited about the possibility of having the opportunity to teach the CCS. The carefully focused, but beautiful, flow of ideas is exciting. The sixth grade course is very well designed to lead into the 7th and then into 8th. After the 6, 7, 8 sequence we should have students very well prepared for the 9th grade Algebra 1 course. The entire K-12 math standards will give students the computational skills they need but more importantly teach them to use mathematical reasoning and how to solve problems.
It is a terrible disservice to any student to have them take Algebra 1 in 8th grade and fail and then have to take it again in 9th grade when it was known before hand they were almost sure to fail the first time. When we make the decisions about assigning students to 8th grade Algebra 1 we discuss several sources of data on each student including the CSU Algebra Readiness test and 7th grade teacher recommendation.
I mention this because I don't think we can improve the 40% very fast. Setting Algebra 1 as the 8th grade course immediately is not possible for us or the hundreds of schools like us. Only 18% of our 7th and 8th teachers have single subject math credentials. We are still using 10 year old math books because there is no money for new books. Our district is proposing increased class sizes. We had a summer school class at the end of 6th grade for students who needed a little boost to get them to 7th grade level and possibly ready for Algebra 1 in 8th grade and our district ended it for financial reasons. We have increasing numbers of students whose families are in disarray and even substantial numbers of students in foster care.
My school has stayed out of PI status by the skin of our teeth so putting all of our 8th graders in Algebra 1 will doom us to being added to the list of failing schools.
I think the ACSC should adopt the CCSI standards essentially unchanged. These are excellent standards and provide a well thought out sequence leading to Algebra 1 in ninth grade. Now what about the question of algebra 1 in 8th grade?
CA currently allows qualified students to take Algebra 1 in seventh or eighth grade and that provision should be continued with the new standards. A strong statement should be included setting the goal of increasing the numbers of students taking Algebra 1 in eighth grade.
One reason we shouldn't rewrite the CCSI standard for 8th grade and turn it into Algebra 1 is it would then be necessary to make substantial changes in the 6th and 7th grade standards to accelerate students enough to be ready for Algebra 1 in 8th grade.
I understand the sentiment that the ACSC should decide on the best standards first without regard to other considerations like funding. On the other hand maybe some have forgotten the staggering amounts of money that would be needed to make Algebra 1 the required 8th grade course.
Jack O'Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, released The California Algebra 1 Success Initiative in 2008. I have a copy here.
Mr. O'Connell estimated $3.1 billion as the cost of making Algebra 1 the required 8th grade course. This is just not possible, so making Algebra 1 the required course would guarantee that California will fail.
Thank you for listening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
