Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

1

Makes Connections to SMPs: SMP Anchor Charts The instructor makes connections between the Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMPs) and the content standards.

Key Method The instructor demonstrates his/her ability to effectively communicate/facilitate conversations regarding connections between the Standards for Mathematical Practice and the grade-level content standards using anchor charts throughout the day, culminating in a focused conversation about the targeted SMPs.

Method Components The intention of this competency is to examine the degree to which the instructor effectively facilitates learning about the Standards for Mathematical Practice and connects the practices to the content standards. A logical place to demonstrate this competency would be to examine the “SMP Posters” generated throughout the day and culminated at the end of the day, but that isn’t necessarily the only way in which this competency can be demonstrated. Components for Effective Communication of SMP Connections to Content Standards Part A. Uses anchor charts throughout the day

§ Posts blank anchor charts beforehand – one for each SMP focus § Adds illustrative content-based examples throughout the day

Part B. Facilitates group conversations around SMP connections to the content standards

§ References the anchor charts during the daily SMP segment § Engages participants in elaborating on the content connections as examples of SMP integration § Facilitates large- and small-group conversations regarding content connections for other domains § Encourages participants to make their thinking visible § Elaborates on important points participants may have missed

Supporting Research Instructor effectively engages participants in the learning process

§ Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the United States and Abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council. https://learningforward.org/docs/pdf/nsdcstudy2009.pdf

§ Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional Development: Toward Better Conceptualizations and Measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181–199. http://edr.sagepub.com/content/38/3/181.abstract

Instructor poses purposeful questions and facilitates conversations

§ Borko, H. (2004). Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.)

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

2

http://stanford.io/2aarVaH

Resources § National Governors Association for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010).

Common core state standards—Mathematics. Washington DC: Author.

§ Progressions Documents for the Common Core Math Standards (2011). http://math.arizona.edu/~ime/progressions/

The Common Core State Standards in mathematics were built on progressions: narrative documents describing the progression of a topic across a number of grade levels, informed both by research on children’s cognitive development and by the logical structure of mathematics.

§ Rimbey, K. A. (2013). From the Common Core to the Classroom: A Professional Development Efficacy Study for the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. http://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.18088

§ Standards for Mathematical Practice: Commentary and Elaborations for K–5 (2014).

http://commoncoretools.me/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Elaborations.pdf

§ Van de Walle, J. A., et al. (2014). Teaching Student-Centered Mathematics: Developmentally Appropriate Instruction for Grades Pre-K-2. Pearson.

§ Van de Walle, J. A., et al. (2014). Teaching Student-Centered Mathematics: Developmentally

Appropriate Instruction for Grades 3-5. Pearson.

§ Van de Walle, J. A., et al. (2014). Teaching Student-Centered Mathematics: Developmentally Appropriate Instruction for Grades 6-8. Pearson.

Submission Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria The items in this following section detail what must be submitted for evaluation. To earn the micro-credential, you must receive a passing evaluation for each question in Parts 1 and 3, and a “Yes” for each component in Part 2. Part 1. Overview Questions (300-word limit for each response) Part A

§ What grade level, domain(s), and SMPs are covered in these anchor charts? - Passing: The instructor lists the grade level, domain(s), and SMPs.

§ What connections did you anticipate ahead of time?

- Passing: The instructor articulates ways in which s/he connected the standards and SMPs prior to the session.

§ What resources did you use to prepare for this part of your day?

- Passing: The instructor lists the resources used to prepare, including those listed above, as applicable.

Part 2. Work Examples/Artifacts Instructor must submit photographs of the SMP anchor charts created throughout the day, displaying connections between the SMPs and the content standards. The rubric will focus on the quality of the

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

3

connections between the content standards and the SMPs as recorded on the anchor chart and the accompanying written reflection.

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

4

Part B

“Yes” “Almost” “Not Yet” “Not Observed”

Posts blank anchor charts beforehand

The reflection indicates that the instructor posted blank anchor charts before class began

The reflection does not indicate that the instructor posted blank anchor charts before class began

Adds illustrative content-based examples throughout the day

The photos and reflection indicate that the instructor and/or participants added at least five examples to each SMP chart throughout the day; all examples clearly illustrate the connections

The photos and reflection indicate that the instructor and/or participants added three or four examples to each SMP chart throughout the day; all examples clearly illustrate the connections

The photos and reflection indicate that the instructor and/or participants added one or two examples to each SMP chart throughout the day OR the examples included, regardless of number, do not clearly illustrate the connections

The photos and reflection do not indicate that the instructor and/or participants added examples to each SMP chart throughout the day

Part 3. Educator Reflection (300-word limit for each response) Part C

§ How did you engage participants in making connections between the SMPs and the content standards throughout the day? - Passing: The instructor describes ways in which s/he engaged participants in making connections.

§ How did you help participants better understand the focus SMPs at the end of the day?

- Passing: The instructor includes examples of when s/he used two or more of the following presenter moves at the end of the day to bring closure to the focus SMPs:

o References the anchor charts o Engages participants in elaborating on the content connections as examples of SMP

integration o Facilitates large- and small-group conversations regarding content connections for other

domains o Encourages participants to make their thinking visible o Elaborates on important points participants may have missed

§ How did you facilitate participant understanding of the SMPs to other content standards?

- Passing: The instructor describes how participants presented their thinking to the rest of the group.