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.

How would I react in a catastrophe?

During the past several weeks after yet another school catastrophe, this time in Florida, I have been quietly contemplating as we wait for the reaction that comes.  What doesn't surprise me, that seems to surprise most of the public, is the impressive nature of the students who survived.  It seems that, as adults we seem to forget how smart our children are.  We allow them to be smart as young children, hope they become more than we are, and finally get annoyed when they come back from college believing they are smarter than us.  This is all fine when they are "our" children.  When they are someone else's child who is trying to tell us what to do then we don't seem to believe they know enough to do that.  Rather ironic isn't it.

The thing is, as teachers we know how smart all of "our" children are.  Even those students we struggle with are really quite intelligent.  "Our" children work, often not as hard as we want them to until they find a reason to show what they are capable of.  "Our" children speak, often not as well as we want them to, until they find a cause that forces them in front of an audience.  "Our" children show passion, too often about things that we don't want them to be passionate about, until they show us the true power of passion.  

"Our" children mean a whole lot to me.  Most of my energy goes to trying to figure out how to harness their potential and create the best child they can become.  Because of that, it bothers me that I don't know how I would react to a similar catastrophe in my building.  Would I do whatever I could to save their life?  I have jumped up and saved a choking baby on a plane.  I have done CPR to a referee at a basketball game.  I have given the Heimlich to a choking adult.  It seems I have had too many opportunities to be around when a life is on the line.  

But none of these were my life...

Would I give my life for another student?  I really don't know.  My thoughts go to my family, my two boys who I have yet to finish raising.  My thoughts go to my wife, whom I look forward to growing old with.  My thoughts go to myself, and the experiences I really would like to have.  Am I willing to sacrifice those for the sake of someone else?  


Is this what I got into education for...

The answer is clearly no.  Educators are educators because they want to empower students through the use of their mind.  One of our biggest assets is trust.  We gain the trust of our students through a long, focused, and persistent process to get to know them and show them we care.  Can I gain a students trust with a gun strapped to my hip as I am now told I, or a few of my colleagues should do?  It seems that would get in the way of a trust building exercise.  If given the choice of being by someone with a gun or without, I would always choose without.  Wouldn't some, if not most of my students feel the same way?  Arming schools is not the solution to fixing this problem.  Making our schools "tougher" is not the solution.  Each of the children who have executed these shootings wouldn't respond well to tougher or more strict schools.  It is not discipline that fixes this. 

It is compassion...

We need to listen to our young adults speaking in front of the microphones.  It is interesting that what we hear on the news is all about the officer outside the building, the lack of a gun in the building, etc...  What we don't hear is what the true problem is, and there are several.  Why do these weapons exist?  Why do we have such easy access to them?  How does a child obtain them without one, if not many other people knowing?  Who do these children confide in?  How do they plan something like these acts and not tell anyone?  Who did these children trust?

We need Congress to help us equip our teachers with the time and talents to get to know the children they have in their classrooms.  We need parents to be an active part of the learning process, not just trusting that teachers can teach their child everything they need to know.  We need Congress to look in the mirror and consider that part of the problem may be themselves.  Finally, we need everyone to open their ears and minds and learn from the same children we have been trying to teach.  The generation we have heard so many concerns about is telling us they have learned.  They have learned and are now ready to teach us.