000PROPOSED SECONDARY MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOK ADOPTION FOR INTEGRATED MATH I-IIIInformation Report No. 3May 1, 2018

Dr. Kelly King, Assistant Superintendent, Educational Services

Presented by:Dr. Chris Coulter, Director, Teaching & Learning

000Local Control Accountability Plan(LCAP) Priorities

2

3-1: Create a positive environment and opportunities for students to connect with their school and community.

3-2: Engage families and community to support student learning.

Increase Engagement3

2-1: Support the social, emotional, and physical needs of all students. 2-2: Provide services and conditions that support student learning.2-3: Provide teachers with tools and training to implement State academic standards.2-4: Provide students with access to support interventions and instructional technology for

learning.

Create a Culture of Learning

2

1-1: Improve academic achievement for all students.1-2: Ensure all students are college and/or career ready upon graduation.

Maximize Student Achievement1

000Background• Last spring, Math CSC voted to pilot two curricula for

Integrated Mathematics (I-III).o College Preparatory Mathematics (CPM)o Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (HMH)

•All middle and high school Integrated I teachers piloted.

•Data was collected for comparison of the two piloted curricula for each grade-band.

3

000Parent and Student Feedback• Student feedback was inconclusive - no clear pattern in

preferences.• Piloted textbooks were available at the District Office and

CVHS from November 27, 2017 through March 16, 2018.• Parent Book Fairs held February 27, 2018, and March 8,

2018.• Parent electronic survey

o April 19 – 24

4

73.40%

26.60%HMH

CPM

000Student Pre- and Post-Test Comparisons

5

% of Change CPM % of Change HMH

MS Integrated I 138% 87%

HS Integrated I 63% 48%

Teacher Analysis of Piloted Curriculum Surveys (Average Results on a Five Point Scale)

Alignment to Content Standards Alignment to SMPs Planning, Support & Materials % of Teachers

Responding to Survey

HMH 3.6 3.3 3.2 73%

CPM 3.9 3.7 3.4 62%

000Pros and Cons of ProgramsCPM

• Proso Student engagemento Strongly aligned to CA State

Standards & SMPso Varying DOK levelso Spiraling of concepts

• Conso Group Work Challengingo Challenge to assess masteryo Not enough practice problems

HMH• Pros

o Teacher directed, flexibilityo Online and teacher resourceso More practice problemso Traditional arrangement of

concepts/standards• Cons

o Questions about alignment to standardso Lack problems at varying DOK levelso Traditional Math program

6

000

Recommendations from Teachers and PrincipalsIntegrated

Teachers Middle School Principals

High School Principals

CPM 18 2 4

HMH 19 1 17

Either program needs to be supplementedwith resources that support the strengths of the other program.

000

Superintendent Recommendation/Next Steps

•The Superintendent recommends that the Board of Education approve a single adoption as follows:o HMH for Integrated Math I – IIIo Supplementary resources to be recommended by Math

CSC

8

000

Questions?

9