Though the picture represents a different reason for my mug smile (taken in May 2022), it makes me feel the same way to try to continue to hope for the future of math standards.
Currently we are working underneath the 2007 Minnesota Math Standards, and version III of the new standards have been out for comment by the public. Before, there were general ideas what was supposed to be presented to Algebra 1, Algebra 2, Geometry, upper standards (advanced data and statistics), but yet did not account for the College Now or other preparatory math many schools have implemented to be competitive.
Here's a case example of hope for improvement. Currently I teach Algebra 1 to the eighth graders in our district. The curriculum we have is very rigorous (that is to say, the book focuses on rational exponents), and gives students little practice with integer exponents to build their confidence. This gap, paired with a low numeracy and low fraction exposure from their previous school experience, creates a slower learning track. As teachers, we always have become accustomed to supplementing and adapting math practice to fill those gaps the publishers don't specifically address. I hope that the new process outlines better ways of increasing student skills (incrementally).
Right now, the suggested standards are multi-dimensional. It also looks like the standards will include 8 math practices, one of them using sense making. If it helps expand their rings of knowledge, I'm all for it, as long as we don't sacrifice or cater to any specific interest groups (an initial concern when I saw version I).
Understand this is a LOT of work on the part of committees who helped put this together and the upcoming committee who will need to form assessment strands to whatever finalized standards we will see. I have been dissuaded from being part of the latter committee (because of the time commitment), but will continue to provide voice and agency to forming them as I can.
Til I chalk again,
Mr. Shel
Comments
Post a Comment