Summarizing the Initial Weeks of COVID Era Instruction

                            

So weeks 1 and 2 are in the books.  We meet with the students every other day and Friday is designed to call in students who need additional support or extension.  If you were to ask me my concerns prior to starting the year they would have been:

• The students remembering what it means to learn
• Trying to figure out how to teach a year of material with depth of understanding while only seeing the students half the time.
• Figuring out how to personally get to know each student
• Safety

As it turns out, safety is the one I feel comfortable with.  My classes are typically filled with sound but this year, with masks, you could hear a pin drop on my carpet.  

I spent a good deal early in the year in the pose of the upper left image and last Friday lived in the pose in the upper right.  Essentially, I will have spent the same amount of class days on a topic I did last year, which means it is going to go twice as long because of the every other day process.  This is not an option!  Furthermore, every time I tried to condense or trust their at home learning skills I was disappointed.  And now, I feel very much like I want to do this:

You see, I needed feedback.  I gave the students an online portion of homework (I love DeltaMath) and a short, thinking-based 10 question online formative.  FYI - last year when we were face-to-face daily I had similar expectations with excellent results.  This year, of the 105 students I have in Algebra 2:

• 53 didn't attempt the formative
• 33 haven't started any of the homework (due tomorrow morning - it is now after 10pm)
• 7 - yes SEVEN finished it

So here I sit, typing when I should be reading or dare I say sleeping, trying to get these thoughts out of my brain as it works overtime.  I've been continually going over this for the past several hours (ok it has been days of this but I didn't want anyone to think I was obsessed) and coming to the same conclusion.  If the students aren't going to do anything when I am not there to encourage and support them this will not work.  Now that I type that I realize it is the same as when we are face-to-face daily but seriously!  We are being asked to do the impossible.  Teach students who forgot what it means to learn and be a student, in an environment that is unwelcome, in half the time...all while accomplishing the same goals in learning.  

So what do I do now....

1. We are reviewing the concepts from the useless formative because ultimately there are 52 students who need quality feedback.
2. I am slowing down to make sure they get the information I need them to this week.  If they are struggling with this the rest of the year is going to feel like climbing Mount Everest.
3. I created a DESMOS activity to support learning that I am giving them for Friday as a pre-teaching session.  I can track who has gone through it.  It has a coding glitch but frankly it is so small I bet only I see it.  If you want to check it out, here it is.
4. I am calling in students (all of them) who didn't finish the formative and/or the homework on Friday.  I am guessing this will be most of my classes.  That should be fun...(sarcasm alert). Oh, and we have been told attendance may be sketchy on Friday's due to travel inability (I kinda get), home life (starting to not totally agree) or work needs (NOPE - sorry, I cannot get behind that).  
5. Monday, we are having a little heart to heart.  Maybe I should just email them this blog and let that do the work for me.  It might be more effective.  
6. Then, and finally, we are going to press a bit.  I am going to force the issue my making the non face-to-face day more rigorous.  Up until now it has been practice and reflection which should have amounted to 30ish minutes a day.  

As a truly dedicated, creative and dedicated teacher (yup, said that twice) this is maddeningly frustrating.  It needs to work.  There is no option and I totally agree this form of instruction is the best we could do at this time.  However, that doesn't mean those of us who care about the kids won't get frustrated.  We will and do.  This is one massive, high risk puzzle.  Last year we patched together a quarter and the outcomes were not great.  This year, we can't do that.  Studies say that 1-year with a bad teacher can take 2 or more to recover from.  Imagine 5 quarters of partial instruction where the issue isn't the teachers effort or ability but the students.  Can one recover from that?

Now, I will pick up a book, read for a while and see if the brain is willing to shut down long enough to recharge.  Then, go to work and see what I can make the day bring.  After all, it is another chance to solve this puzzle.

Equity, Standards, Pathways, and Options Part 2

 Equity, Standards, Pathways, and Options 

Part 2

After a week of reflecting on the most recent meeting I am ready to discuss what we met about on the standards revision committee.

The 2+1 model is clearly the way we are heading and rightfully so.  The idea of two core classes (more than likely Algebra 1 and Geometry, not necessarily in that order, or an integrated approach to the two) makes so much sense for so many students.  Then, choosing the course that means something for the student.  This could be a UW-Gateway course such as College Algebra (Algebra 2 equivalent), Quantitative Reasoning or Statistics.  It could also be a different elective a school offers.  However, all of this is dependent on the standards.

To that end, we started looking specifically at the standards.  The overwhelming consensus from the statewide feedback was that major changes were not necessarily needed but there was cleanup that needed to be done.  The initial question:  Is a + standard a standard?  I don't believe it is and the longer I consider that idea the more I settle on that realization.  It is by definition "beyond the core."  Therefore, not a standard.  Does that mean it is not meant for instruction?  Not necessarily.  It can and should be instructed for students seeking a career in STEM.  Not for students who are not desiring a career in STEM.  These are courses beyond the 2+ level.

What are some of these standards we are discussing?  They are things like complex numbers.  We are still working through the standards but complex number concepts are common standards that are discussed regularly.  Does every student need to know and understand what a complex number is?  Or is it enough that they understand when real solutions do not exist.  So far, the latter is a stronger argument.

Tomorrow, I personally am looking forward to the additional discussions and reviewing the remaining standards.  If we can reduce them to a more manageable quantity while focusing them without drastically changing them, it will help students.  If, while doing this we can organize them in a manner that promotes equity while maintaining rigor we have a major win.  

I actually feel we will get there soon!

Equity, standards, Pathways, and Options

Equity, Standards, Pathways, and Options 

Part 1

This past year and now into the next year I have had the opportunity to participate on the WI-University System Math Initiative.  The initiative is a multi-institutional collaboration of UW faculty, staff, and administrators working to improve student success by helping incoming students successfully complete their gateway mathematics course by the end of their first two semesters of study.  In addition, I am currently on the WI-State Mathematics Standards Revision team.  The overlapping concepts, along with striving for more equitable pathways for students while also increasing the quality of instruction, has caused my brain to spin, and it feels great!  For the first time in my 24  years in education I feel like the alignment of all the moving parts is happening.  We just need to convince everyone that the moment has arrived for math to finally make the needed changes we have been waiting for.

Although I was purely in an advisory role during the UW-University System Math Initiative, the results were very promising.  The creation of gateway courses:  College Algebra, Quantitative Reasoning, and Statistics allow the secondary schools to alter their offerings and standards alignment while truly, possibly for the first time, understanding the expectations of the post-secondary schools.  

For many years we have seen the issues in secondary math instruction.  Perpetual struggle, lack of interest, ongoing remediation and much more that we don't need to reiterate here.  This has happened not because there is a lack of quality instruction, not because teachers haven't kept up with the times (although in fairness there is some of that in all schools), but because students don't see the value of mathematics.  In most cases, they are correct.  Technology has advanced to make the computing of math obsolete.  This is not to say that pure mathematics isn't needed.  It is...for less than 5% of the population.  The very same population we have been focusing all of our curriculum on.  Sure, there are plenty of remedial courses but they are based on the same foundations of Algebra, Geometry and Algebra 2.  It is only after Algebra 2 that we begin to get creative with our course offerings.

 I am excited for math because we may now have the ability to change the entire paradigm in the above paragraph.  Since this is the first blog in what I expect is a series of reflections as the standards revision process starts, I will keep it short.  I wish to leave it with my early goals in the process.

I hope:

• we can eliminate several standards at the 9-12 level in mathematics further focusing our content.  The clear place to start is the + standards.  These are extensions of the CCSS and thus not a standard of instruction.  However, in addition to the + standards we need to rethink concepts like complex numbers, logarithms, etc...  Are these really for ALL students or for STEM students?  
• we can organize the 9-12 standards similar to the grade level standards in K-8.  My concern is it may direct districts to a specific set of pathways which may cause unintentional controversy in light of local control.  At minimum, I would like to see a more defined appendix that gives clarity to which standards should be taught by year.
• we can develop core years of math, through 10th grade allowing students to choose a pathway that includes STEM options that instructs some of the content in a normal Algebra 2 course after grade 10 or an assortment of other pathways that are not STEM related.
• we can either emphasize statistics or define a broader category of quantitative literacy that is integrated in year 1 and 2 of 9-12 math instruction.  Actually leading to its instruction.

These are purely initial thoughts.  We have a long way to go and honestly a very short time to complete it.  Stay tuned for updates.