Mathematics Core Review Committee Meeting

1
Mathematics Core ReviewCommittee Meeting

• Utah State Office of Education
• South Board Room
• June 9, 2006

2
Agenda

• Welcome
• Panel
• Perspectives on the Core from Teachers
• Q and A from Committee
• Committee Review of Core and Implementation
• Identify Committee
• Professional Development
• Resources for Instruction
• Changes in Graduation Requirements
• Lunch
• Board of Regents Award and other STEM News
• Third Party Evaluation Discussion
• Other

3
Panelists

• Elementary
• Toni Cook, Granite School District
• Melissa Garber, Jordan School District
• Carol Nef, Davis School District
• Secondary
• Diane Crim, Salt Lake School District
• Walter Lewis, Jordan School District
• Heather Riddle, Granite School District
• Susan Sommerkorn, Davis School District

4
Teacher Panel

• Statement
• Response to Specific Questions
• Open Question and Answer Session with Committee

5
Committee Review of Core and Implementation

• Review of Core by Subcommittee
• Review of Implementation Plan
• Distribution
• State Mathematics Education Coordination
  Committee
• Statewide Professional Development
• Core Academy
• Endorsement Courses
• Secondary Teachers Summer Professional
  Development
• District Activities
• Professional Development
• Core Curriculum Mapping
• Alignment of Instructional Resources to Core
• Instructional Materials Review Process
• 4-6 Mathematics Initiative

6
Changes in Graduation Requirements

• 4-3-3
• Math Grades 9 -12
• Three years of mathematics including successful
  completion of Intermediate Algebra
• OR
• Four years including elementary algebra and
  geometry, four years may include applied,
  advanced or supplemental courses

7
Recent Events in STEM Education

• American Competitiveness Program
• Grants to Students
• Based on Course of Study
• Target Math and Science Careers
• Regents Scholar Award
• Federal STEM Legislation
• MSP Title II B
• Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program
• Provides scholarships to math and science majors
  in return for a commitment to teaching
• The Math and Science Partnership Program at NSF
  which would be re-focused on programs and
  training K-12 math and science teachers and the
  Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
  Talent Expansion

8

Summary of Academic Competitiveness Grants
Academic Competitiveness Grants, Section 401A of
the Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005
establishes a grant program for students who have
concentrated in math/science or a foreign
language critical to U.S. National Security. The
provision has significant implications for
registrars as eligibility involves recognition of
academically rigorous high school curricula,
specified majors, and definitions/equivalences of
a 3.0 G.P.A.
9
2nd Academic Year Undergraduate at Two- or Four-
Year Degree-Granting Higher Education Institution

• Must have completed a rigorous (as recognized by
  the Sec of Ed.) secondary school program
  established by a state or local education agency
  after January 1, 2005
• The Secretary will recognize at least one
  rigorous secondary school program in each state
  for the purpose of determining student
  eligibility
• Must have a cumulative GPA of at least 3.0 (or
  the equivalent as determined under regulations
  prescribed by the Secretary of Education) at the
  conclusion of the first year of undergraduate
  education
• Grant amount 1,300

10
3rd or 4th Academic Year Undergraduate at Four-
Year Degree-Granting Higher Education Institution

• Pursuing a major in physical, life, or computer
  sciences, mathematics, technology, or engineering
  (as determined by the Secretary of Education
  pursuant to regulations) OR a foreign language
  determined by the Secretary and Director of
  National Intelligence as critical to U.S.
  national security
• Have a cumulative GPA of at least 3.0 (or the
  equivalent as determined under regulations
  prescribed by the Secretary of Education) in the
  coursework for their major
• Grant amount 4,000

11
Evaluation Questions

• Does the Core have appropriate mathematics
  content as compared to the PSSM/NAEP framework?
• What is the balance among procedural fluency,
  computational efficiency, conceptual
  understanding, and applications?
• Is the Core developmentally appropriate?
• Do the mathematics content and processes in the
  Core articulate well?
• Is the intent and purpose of the Core clearly
  described?
• How does the Utah Mathematics Core compare to
  other states (CA and two others structurally
  aligned to Core Curriculums and performing well
  on national measures) and national standards
  (PSSM)?

12
Possible Future Activities

• Website Information
• Core Review by Sub-Committee
• Future Meetings