DeAnn Huinker, UW-MilwaukeeMMP Principal Investigator26 August 2008

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0314898. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Funded Projects across the Country◦Comprehensive Projects (12)◦Targeted Projects (28)◦Institute Projects (12)

Milwaukee Mathematics PartnershipComprehensive K-12 Mathematics Project◦$20 million◦2003–present

Distributed Leadership

Student Learning Continuum

Teacher Learning Continuum

Mathematics Framework

Implement and utilize the Comprehensive Mathematics Framework to lead a collective vision of deep learning and quality teaching of challenging mathematics across the Milwaukee Partnership.

No district math framework No learning targets No State Assessment Framework or descriptors No district CABS (classroom assessments) No Benchmark Assessments or Readiness Exam No math curriculum guides No common high school syllabi Many textbook programs across the district

Then … 2003Then … 2003

Now… 2008Now… 2008

CABS & BenchmarksCurriculum Guides, K-10HS course syllabiCommon textbooks

CABS & BenchmarksCurriculum Guides, K-10HS course syllabiCommon textbooks

Consistency in math instruction—what & how

Aligning curriculum to learning targets

Using CABS and student work to inform practice

Studying WKCE/benchmark data on student progress

Engagement in talking with other teachers about the teaching and learning mathematics

MMP Annual Survey, Spring 2008

Institute a distributed mathematics leadership model that engages all partners and is centered on school-based professional learning communities.

No Math Teacher Leaders !!

No assessment pilot, textbook implementation, transition, or benchmark leaders…!!

No Math Teaching Specialists!!!

No formal UWM “math” partnership!!!!

Learning Teams not focused on mathematics.

Then … 2003Then … 2003

IHE Faculty Mathematic

s & Math Education

Now… 2008Now… 2008

DistrictMathematic

s Leadership (MCS, MTS)

Learning Team

Other Key Teachers

Principal

Literacy

Coach

Math Teache

r Leader

Focus on the

“Continuum”

of Work for

Mathematics

Focus on the

“Continuum”

of Work for

Mathematics

Funding for

Math Action

PlansFunding for

Math Action

Plans

204 MTLs

60 Gr 8-9204 MTLs

60 Gr 8-9

Stage 1Learning Targets

Stage 2Alignment of

State Framework & Math Program

Stage 3Common

Classroom Assessments

Stage 4Student Work

on CABS

Stage 5Descriptive Feedbackon CABS

Understand importance of identifying and articulating big ideas in mathematics to bring consistency to a school’s math program.

Develop meaning for the math embedded in the targets and alignment to state standards and descriptors and to the school’s math program.

Provide a measure of consistency of student learning based on standards/descriptors and targets.

Examine student work to monitor achievement and progress toward the targets and descriptors.

Use student work to inform instructional decisions, and to provide students with appropriate descriptive feedback.

Tools• Grade level lists of 9-11 big ideas per grade (the targets)• Horizontal list of targets by content across grades

Tools• Target-descriptor alignment worksheets• WKCE Depths of Knowledge Framework• Curriculum Guides

Tools• Curriculum Guides • District Model CABS• Depths of Knowledge worksheet• CABS Assessment Overview worksheet• WKCE and Benchmarks student data

Tools• MMP Protocol for Analysis of Student Work• DVD of MMP Protocol• CABS Class Summary Report form• School Educational Plan

Tools• Types of Feedback sheet • Descriptive feedback worksheets• CABS Class Feedback Summary worksheet

Year 1 2003-04

101 38% 53% 9% 0% 1%

n

Stage 1Learning Targets

Stage 2Alignment

State & Program

Stage 3Common

CABS

Stage 4Student Work

Stage 5Descriptiv

e Feedback

Year 5 2007-08 109 2% 12% 22% 41% 23%

Year 4 2006-07 109 11% 26% 39% 18% 6%

Year 3 2005-06 89 13% 26% 41% 18% 2%

Year 2 2004-05 97 18% 34% 38% 5% 4%

n

Stage 1Learning Targets

Stage 2Alignment

State & Program

Stage 3Common

CABS

Stage 4Student Work

Stage 5Descriptive Feedback

Year 4 2006-07 20 50% 25% 25% 0% 0%

Year 5 2007-08 20 5% 30% 40% 20% 5%

Build and sustain the capacity of teachers, from initial preparation through induction and professional growth, to understand mathematics deeply and use that knowledge to improve student learning.

No MTL meetings

No Assessment Pilots or Transition meetings

No Math Actions Plans or Mini-Grants

No UWM-MMP courses

No high school labs or rigor sessions

Then … 2003Then … 2003

Now… 2008Now… 2008

Monthly MTL meetings, school-based professional math learning, UWM courses, high school labs, and more …

Monthly MTL meetings, school-based professional math learning, UWM courses, high school labs, and more …

Focused on learning …. mathematics content, leadership skills, instructional strategies, formative assessment, descriptive feedback, networking, and much more …

Focused on learning …. mathematics content, leadership skills, instructional strategies, formative assessment, descriptive feedback, networking, and much more …

€

6 ÷3

4= ?

Years 1 & 2 Content Focus: Number &

Operations

5 + 7 = + 8

Year 3 Content Focus: Algebraic Reasoning

Year 4 Content Focus: Measurement &

Geometry

Nine teachers reported their years of experience as follows:

7, 5, 5, 4, 6, 8, 7, 6, 6Arrange cubes to represent this data set.What is the median? What is the mean?

Nine teachers reported their years of experience as follows:

7, 5, 5, 4, 6, 8, 7, 6, 6Arrange cubes to represent this data set.What is the median? What is the mean?

Year 5 Content Focus: Statistics &

Probability

Rearrange the cubes to represent another sample of 9 teachers that had the same median years of experience, but a different mean of fewer yearsthe mean?

Rearrange the cubes to represent another sample of 9 teachers that had the same median years of experience, but a different mean of fewer yearsthe mean?

Significant increases for MTLs on Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching assessments!!!

Over 2000 enrollments in 79 sections of UWM-MMP courses in 5 years (~ $700,000 tuition waived)

About 65,000 hours of math PD for 2800 teachers in each of three years; mean of 20 hours per teacher.

Ensure all students, PK-16, have access to, are prepared and supported for, and succeed in challenging mathematics.

24

Are student achievement gains in mathematics greater in schools that have more fully embraced MMP principles?

YES

Math Focus

Pro

fici

ency

School Math Focus versus WKCE Proficiency Fall 2007

Math Focus

Perc

enta

ge P

oin

t C

hang

eSchool Math Focus versus 3-Year WKCE Percentage Point Increase

Governor’s MPS Mathematics Initiative NSF carry-over funds for MMP NSF support for MMP Phase II MPS Action (Strategic) Plan MPS Mathematics Functional Plan MPS DIFI Plan Math Fellows Project Other grant projects (e.g., GKT)

28

Milwaukee Mathematics Partnership

Build the capacity of schools for continuous improvement toward student success with challenging mathematics.

www.mmp.uwm.edu