Mathematics teachers and thinking about and planning for aligning their mathematics curriculum to the CCSSM. A textbook is one of the most important resources a teacher uses in the teaching of mathematics. Select any mathematics textbook — one you are using or are interested in using and review how the usefulness of the textbook in aligning to the CCSSM.
After identifying the textook please include the following:
1. Choose one big idea (critical area) and analyze the following:
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM;
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole; and
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics; and
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
My curriculum: Holt – Geometry
1. Choose one big idea (critical area) and analyze the following:
My choice of “critical area” is the following:
Students’ experience with two-dimensional and three-dimensional objects is extended to include informal explanations of circumference, area and volume formulas. Additionally, students apply their knowledge of two-dimensional shapes to consider the shapes of cross-sections and the result of rotating a two-dimensional object about a line.
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM;
In looking at this critical area, there seems to be an emphasis on explaining the 2-D and 3-D formulas. From teaching out of Holt Geometry, I feel that this curriculum does a decent job with this. I know that the area of a circle formula is explained by having students consider cutting the circle into a bunch of little slices and laying them side-by-side (creating roughly a parallelogram). The bummer though with our curriculum is that way before introducing it this way, the textbook 8 chapters earlier just tells them the formula. The curriculum also does a great job of introducing cones and pyramids together, as well as cylinders and prisms together. I bring this up, because this enforces not memorizing the formula but rather see the connection between these 3-D shapes.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole; and
I think this curriculum does a good job of expanding the math concepts, but it doesn’t do a great job connecting the math concepts. Also, the curriculum first introduces most 2-D formulas in the first chapter, but not until chapter 9 and chapter 10, does it begin to expand on these concepts and visit 3-D shapes. So in terms of being unified, I think some reworking of the curriculum would be needed.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
I think this is one area where this curriculum is weak. It does give some suggestions as to alternative approaches to teaching certain concepts, however, this isn’t the overall intention of the curriculum. The curriculum offers a variety of assessments, however again most of them are designed to assess the traditional approach to teaching each concept.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
Something that this curriculum offers is an abundance of additional resources. One of these resources is a problem solving worksheet for each lesson. This worksheet attempts to model the concept in an applicable real-world context. I say “attempts,” because as we have discussed in class, often these really aren’t good “real” – world problems. Within each homework problem set there typically is a handful of problems that connect to other disciplines like science or other real-world job applications.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics; and
Also, as we have discussed in class, the Mathematical Practices in the CCSSM place an emphasis on modeling. Holt Geometry is probably better than some traditional curriculums, but it is still traditional. Our curriculum does a pretty good job with the first Mathematical Practice (make sense of problems and persevere in solving them); most lessons have a Focus on Problem Solving problem. Here they encourage the process of understanding the problem, making a plan, solving the problem, and looking back at the problem.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
The curriculum doesn’t offer any formative or summative assessments that are aligned with the common core standards. Our issue of the Holt Geometry series came out before the common core standards were formalized. The curriculum does offer an abundance of formative and summative assessments which should align as much as the curriculum as a whole aligns to the CCSSM’s.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
For this specific “critical area”, I think it has been pretty easy to align our curriculum to the CCSSM. As pointed out above, there are some concepts that aren’t expanded and connected as a unified whole. Some work needs to be done in emphasizing the modeling. Some of this exists in the curriculum, but a lot more is going to need to be supplemented to meet the CCSSM’s. Also, one of the standards emphasizes “identify(ing) three dimensional objects generated by rotations of two-dimensional object.” This is another area where some additional supplementing will need to be done. I don’t see this being a part of the curriculum, though I wouldn’t be surprised to see an extension activity on this.
Aaron
Pearson Algebra 1 Common Core textbook
Choose one big idea (critical area) and analyze the following:
By the end of eighth grade students have learned to solve linear equations in one variable and have applied graphical and algebraic methods to analyze and solve systems of linear equations in two variables. This unit builds on these earlier experiences by asking students to analyze and explain the process of solving an equation. Students develop fluency writing, interpreting, and translating between various forms of linear equations and inequalities, and using them to solve problems. They master the solution of linear equations and apply related solution techniques and the laws of exponents to the creation and solution of simple exponential equations. All of this work is grounded on understanding quantities and on relationships between them.
Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM
This cluster seems to be spread throughout the entire book. The curriculum does have a chapter that is dedicated to solving linear equations, even though this should be covered in 8th grade. However, it breaks into separate chapters for inequalities, systems and multiple representations of functions. The idea of “developing fluency writing, interpreting, and translating between forms” is throughout each of these chapters that lead to the culminating idea of exponential equations at the end. The problem sets throughout the chapters all include problems that ask the students to explain the errors, what they should do in their first steps and describing how to solve problems. These problems are very good practice for this standard, and there is a lot of it! This curriculum develops this idea very thoroughly and it is visited throughout the text.
b. The standard cluster is developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole
As I mentioned above, the cluster is taught throughout the entire curriculum and the connection is made to each new concept in the problem sets. Considering that this cluster is visited every chapter, it means that it is developed and expanded as a unified whole. It starts with the simple context of order of operations and simple equations and works towards the exponential equations.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
The text gives multiple ways to introduce the material (tech options and group activities) but it is a very straight-forward way of teaching the concepts. The lesson part is set up in a very traditional way of teaching with very few exceptions.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
This book is littered with activities and connections to other subjects and real-life situations. However, the problems are very formulaic and do not require large amounts of problem solving skills. This are similar to what we discussed in class. However, they could easily be modified to create a higher level of problem solving and thinking required of the students.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics; and
This curriculum does have a focus on the Mathematical Practice Standards and is better than the other texts that we have. There are a lot of activities throughout the text that require precision, problem solving skills, multiple representations, and proper use of tools. There are several problems within the problem sets that also require higher level thinking. Even though this text is better than most, it will need some more supplemental problems to work on this and give them more practice on this.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
This text does have mid-chapter quizzes and end-of-chapter assessments. It also includes standardized test prep tests, and an end-of-course test that is aligned with the CCSS. Due to the huge amount of material covered in each chapter, I think this text will require a few more quizzes to help the students retain information throughout. The formative assessments are decent, but could use some editing.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
For this cluster, the alignment to our curriculum is going to be very easy. This is a cluster that is strong for our curriculum. We will just have to make sure to keep a focus on it throughout each chapter since this cluster is so spread. We cannot afford to let it drop for one of the chapters.
Casey
Holt- Geometry
1. Critical Area – Congruent Triangles (Chapter 4)
“In previous grades, students were asked to draw triangles based on given measurements. They also have prior experience with rigid motions: translations, reflections, and rotations and have used these to develop notions about what it means for two objects to be congruent. In this unit, students establish triangle congruence criteria, based on analyses of rigid motions and formal constructions. They use triangle congruence as a familiar foundation for the development of formal proof. Students prove theorems—using a variety of formats—and solve problems about triangles, quadrilaterals, and other polygons. They apply reasoning to complete geometric constructions and explain why they work.”
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM
I feel like the Holt text does a pretty good job in this area. One weakness with the Holt text is the explanation of congruence through rigid motions. Even though Holt does explain both congruence and transformations, the connection between the two to develop a better understanding of the concepts is not there. Students will still develop the criteria for which triangles are congruent (SSS, SAS, ASA, AAS, and HL), but these are not based on the analyses of rigid motions, as described in the critical area above. Holt also gives several formats for proofs, including statement/ reason charts, paragraph proofs, and flowchart proofs.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole;
I think the text does a good job of explaining the concepts, but as discussed above, there is a definite connection missed between congruence and rigid motion. In fact, transformations are mentioned briefly in Chapter 1, but are not discussed in-depth until Chapter 12 (the last chapter!). This is unfortunate since students are exposed to dilations in the Similarity chapter, but the connection is lost when talking about congruence. Clearly, the text could be better organized to better meet the CCSSM.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
Especially in this critical area, I feel like the text does not give multiple approaches to solving problems. As mentioned above, there are multiple approaches given to writing formal proofs. Overall, I have found Holt to be very traditional in the methods of instruction as well as assessment.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
I feel like Holt is a great resource for extra practice problems, worksheets, and examples, though the quality is questionable. These resources are great for a more traditional approach to teaching the concepts, including more challenging or problem solving activities and problems. As we’ve discussed in class, these problems are rarely true problem solving; most/all of the information is presented to the student and is often accompanied by a guide or step-by-step process to solve the problem.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics
Holt does a pretty good job with the mathematical practices as described by the CCSSM. Though there are adjustments teachers should make, there is usually a couple problems in each section that elicit deeper thinking.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
Again, Holt does provide several different quizzes, cumulative tests, worksheets, etc that are a valuable resource for teachers. However, these resources are aligned with the textbook, not particularly the CCSSM.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
As discussed above, the current curriculum is fairly well aligned with the CCSSM. Using the online text book and resources, I found that there is a section titled “Common Core Resources” where supplemental material has been added to better align with the CCSSM.
-Katelyn
Textbook: Carnegie Algebra 1
1. Choose one big idea (critical area) and analyze the following: The critical area that I chose to use was Unit 1 for Algebra 1: Relationships Between Quantities and reasoning with Equations.
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM
After inspecting the textbook and comparing it to the CCSSM framework for this critical area, it is safe to say that this book does meet its basic requirements of its overall focus on expressions, equations, and inequalities. For example, the main focus of this curriculum repeatedly reintroduces the requirements for the students to represent their math by graphing the linear equations and inequalities that they create in each lesson.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole.
While examining the textbook, I can say that this curriculum does do a fairly good job at connecting the math concepts as a whole. However, the only problem is that in order to meet all of the requirements of this critical area you would have to skip from chapter to chapter to use the specific lessons that do meet the requirements. When considering how well this curriculum does at expanding the concepts beyond the basic requirements, I have found it does not do well at expanding the required concepts. In fact, this curriculum mainly keeps the students working within the entry to middle levels of difficulty and depth of the required concepts.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
This curriculum does lead the students through a sequence of steps when solving a problem to provide them with one way to solve a certain type of problem, however; this textbook does promote the use of multiple representations and ways to solve the same type of problem. The area in which I do feel that this curriculum does need some help is in their provided assessments. In my opinion, their assessments do not directly relate to the lessons that are taught to the students. Their assessments are much more difficult than the lessons that the students work with in the book and on the computer.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote: (The resources that are included with the Carnegie Curriculum are Chapter tests, skill practice sheets for each lesson, a Homework Helper Text, a Student Assignment Text, a computer component, and PDF files of all three textbooks).
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society , and the workplace
The one thing that this curriculum does do well is promote modeling activities that directly connect to everyday life, society, and the workplace. Every lesson in this text begins with scenario of a real-world situation and ends with a modeling through graphing activity. In addition, there are a few lessons that do require the students to have a more hands-on approach to the lesson, but due to the length of the lessons, they were not part of our curriculum last year.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics
When considering how well this curriculum meets the mathematical practice standards for the CCSSM, I feel that this curriculum meets them at the most basic of levels. Carnegie does ask the students to make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. Carnegie does require the students to reason quantitatively, but rarely requires them to reason abstractly. The students are required to work together in groups for each lesson and critique the reasoning of their group members. Also, they are asked to express regularity in repeated reasoning by formally writing their answers and findings in words for each lesson. As I mentioned earlier, each lesson requires the students to create a graphical model representation of their findings. This allows the Carnegie curriculum to meet the modeling standard of the CCSSM. In addition, the computer portion of this curriculum focuses more on requiring the students to attend to precision while using their tools strategically to solve their problems. If they fail to do that, they will not move forward in the computer portion of the Carnegie Algebra 1 curriculum.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards
After reviewing the assessments that have been provided by Carnegie and the ones that we are required to use, I have found that the assessments meet the requirements of my chosen critical are at a deeper level. As I mentioned earlier, the provided assessments are much more difficult that the textbook and computer lessons that are actually used in class. Based on that fact, I can say that the assessments are more closely aligned with the CCSSM in comparison to the daily lessons.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSS
Although the teacher’s edition of the text does provide great documentation of its alignment to the NCTM Standards for each lesson, it does not provide any information or even mention the CCSSM. Based on that fact, it is the teacher’s responsibility to determine how and if the Carnegie curriculum aligns to the CCSSM for my chosen critical area as well as the other remaining critical areas.
We don’t have a textbook, but we use other books as resources for our curriculum. The one book that I used the most last year and the district is probably going to look at to purchase is Pearson Geometry Common Core.
The one big idea (critical area) is congruent triangles, this you can find in Unit four and by coincidence is also the number of our unit in our curriculum.
a. The development of mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM.
I believe that this book does a fair job on developing the concepts throughout the book, in just this unit it doesn’t give the students answers but the approach is to have the students “discover” the patterns to come up with answers. The unit has real life problems to reinforce the concepts and also has hands on activities at the end of each lesson, too bad there is not enough time to use them all. Although this unit is about triangles it also introduces some parallelograms and other polygons.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole;
This book does expand and connect to other concepts like rigid motions. There is also algebra review with concepts needed to solve the problems in geometry; and problems in which students have to think about angles of other type of polygons. For some of the real life problems, students have to approach the problem using concepts from previous units/lessons which reinforces the concepts.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
Although the book seems like is just another text book from years before with better pictures, it does have different approaches to solve the problems and also for the assessments. The worksheets are typical like any other curriculum, but the problems available to the students in the book and also online will help the students with the learning of the concepts. The lesson check in each lesson has different type of questions: open ended, extended response, short response, multiple choice, etc.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
As I stated before this book does have real life problems which connects the math concepts to everyday life. Some of the problems are just repetitive procedures but overall it does enough work on problem solving for the students to solve. The only thing that I found out is that there are not enough challenging problems in this unit as I would like to use other than the one on one of the worksheets.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics;
I believe that this book does a better job than other books on mathematical practices and multiple approaches to learning and also to solve problems. But as I stated before, I need to see more challenging questions and problems. One or two per lesson is not enough.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards
This book has quizzes for the lesson, lesson checkups, standardized test prep questions, mixed reviews, etc. and they all aligned to the common core standards.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
The book has the content standard at the top of each lesson, and the common core standards are at the beginning of the book for quick reference. It also indicates through the lesson which one are the mathematical practices activities. In the table of content you will see the units aligned to the clusters in the Common Core Standards.
I use Glencoe McGraw-Hill Geometry textbook in my class.
I am choosing to discuss Critical Area 4:
“Building on their work with the Pythagorean theorem in 8th grade to find distances, students use a
rectangular coordinate system to verify geometric relationships, including properties of special triangles and quadrilaterals and slopes of parallel and perpendicular lines, which relates back to work done in the first course. Students
continue their study of quadratics by connecting the geometric and algebraic definitions of the parabola.”
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM
Analytic geometry occurs throughout most sections of this textbook and is used in many cases to help students explore concepts inductively. However, the CCSSM bundles the example elements in Critical Area 4 in a way that differs from the textbook. The flow of the textbook (which even our math department disputes) proceeds in the following manner: geometry tools, reasoning/proof, parallel and perpendicular lines, congruent triangles, relationships in triangles, quadrilaterals, proportion and similarity, right triangles/trigonometry, transformations and symmetry, circles, Areas/Perimeter of 2D figures, Surface Area/Volume of 3D figures, probability and Measurement. However, we see similar concepts recommended to be taught in a nearly opposite manner. Certainly I think that Glencoe can get the kids to standard with the information and the delivery of this textbook, yet I do not think that this Glencoe progression aligns with CCSSM.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole
The Critical Area focuses on using analytic geometry and distances (or properties of distance) establish geometric relationships. These relationships include comparing slopes of lines to determine perpendicular/parallel, comparing distances of lines as they might be positioned in a quadrilateral and special right triangles. The textbook hints at this progression by focusing on tools and facts about parallel and perpendicular lines from the get go, but the extent through which the book recommends that students make connections using analytic geometry is diminished in the face of exploring relationships between geometric figures based upon broader generalizations (i.e. based upon properties and facts) and not explored through inductively designed examples. The textbook can be used in this way to teach the concept continually throughout the year, provided that as a teacher, I have my focus and daily reminders set on making sure students see these analytic examples.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
The textbook is very linear and focused on specificities. To explain this away to savvy textbook adopters who might want to see some kind of circular teaching, Glencoe includes review questions in their homework section, but does not necessarily call upon learning made in a previous lesson to build upon the learning of this new lesson. As this relates to Critical Area 4, the Glencoe textbook reminds students of the concept of distance, slope, midpoint, etc. early on, teaches it to the level of example compared to the student’s current understanding and then moves on and, I believe, assumes that the teacher will provide supplemental instruction when a new, difficult geometry concept comes up wherein the student may need to use analytic geometry, but can’t because the level of application isn’t there.
So, when students are taught to prove triangles congruent, there isn’t much direction to the teacher from the text to point out to the students that we can explore this concept of congruence on a coordinate plane. When students are studying transformations, the discussion on checking that distance is preserved happens, and then the book seems to turn the switch and approach another problem that uses a different technique and the book makes not indication that either technique could be used to learn about either concept.
Since the book has this linearity, the recommended assessments, e.g. quizzes, chapter tests, unit tests, recommended homework, do not provide students with multiple options to demonstrate a solution to a problem. I’m saying that much of the problems used in assessments are answer-unknown problems which a student will work diligently with one method to get the solution, and then with the answer in hand, they can move on to the next question and switch their focus to the next question without regard to multiple ways of demonstrating understanding.
As a math department, we realized this when we tried to use the assessments to tell us meaningful information about the students’ propensity for success on the EOC. So, we scrapped the assessments and built our own.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
When adopted, the textbook did come with multiple resource handouts to assist the teacher in preparing and the students in learning. However, some of the handouts are designed to be teacher proof, meaning: the teacher passes out the study guide hand out, reads some examples from the text, gives students the time to copy down what the teacher wrote down, and then gives students the practice problem handouts.
There are explorations that incorporate technology, manipulatives, and creativity into teaching and learning, provided that students have the technology, the teacher understands the intent of the manipulative, and the students can be creative and still learn the mathematics. Furthermore, the resources that accompany the curriculum have “enrichment” opportunities. These opportunities are suggested extensions of the lesson. Some are useful, fewer are really useful, most are garbage.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics; and
The main method of students being successful through the use of this textbook is to read and follow along with the examples and practice the problems that accompany each section. There is not real push to utilize problem solving. If a student struggles with a question in the homework, much like Dan Brown points out, the textbook includes helpful hints to the location of a similar example next to the problem or section in which the student is working. If the mathematical practices are:
Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them,
Reason abstractly and quantitatively,
Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others,
Model with mathematics,
Use appropriate tools strategically,
Attend to precision,
Look for and make use of structure,
Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning,
then this textbook is lacking.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
There are no methods of assessing aligned to common core. We as a department created better and more aligned questions to the WA standards than this curriculum. Upon further contemplation, the assessments of this book are merely to determine if a student has been successful in acquiring the mathematical knowledge as this book established it. The creators might have reasoned that a student being successful on the text’s assessments should be successful on the standardized assessments, but I contend that a great teacher who doesn’t teach so that students can be successful on the standardized assessment will produce no better results than a mediocre teacher who teaches to the best of their ability so that students can be successful on the standardized assessments.
Since the textbook doesn’t assess standard on the CCSSM, any alignment as identified must come from my math department on the work that we did to check alignment of Glencoe geometry to the WA state standards. The curriculum doesn’t provide any sort of alignment matrix.
My Curriculum: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill
1. Choose one big idea (critical area) and analyze the following:
Algebra 1 Critical Area 2: In earlier grades, students define, evaluate, and compare functions, and use them to model relationships between quantities. In this unit, students will learn function notation and develop the concepts of domain and range. They explore many examples of functions, including sequences; they interpret functions given graphically, numerically, symbolically, and verbally, translate between representations, and understand the limitations of various representations. Students build on and informally extend their understanding of integer exponents to consider exponential functions. They compare and contrast linear and exponential functions, distinguishing between additive and multiplicative change. Students explore systems of equations and inequalities, and they find and interpret their solutions. They interpret arithmetic sequences as linear functions and geometric sequences as exponential functions.
a. Development of the mathematical ideas are conceptually developed with a framework described in the CCSSM;
In reading through the example unit for this critical area and all of the CCSSM that are included in the unit, I feel that our curriculum aligns extremely well, with the exception of a few concepts. I have taught Algebra 1 for several years now and most of these concepts are covered throughout our year. One concept that I know that we currently do not cover in Algebra 1 that shows up in this critical area is rational exponents. We cover integer exponents; however rational exponents do not show up until Algebra 2 for us. In fact they were only briefly mentioned at all in the Algebra 1 book. So this is an area that we may need to supplement with some Algebra 2 materials. Another concept that I notice that we do not currently cover is graphing quadratics, logarithms, and trigonometric functions. Our Algebra 1 book does have a section on graphing quadratics, however, we have never covered that section, although knowing it needs to be included now, it would not be that hard to add it in. Logarithms and Trigonometric Functions are again completely absent from our Algebra 1 book, so they would also need to be supplemented with material from our Algebra 2 book.
b. The standard cluster(s) are developed by expanding and connecting math concepts as a unified whole; and
The concepts included in this critical area are spread out through various chapters in the Algebra 1 book. I do believe that the book does a great job of expanding the concepts in a logical format, however, I don’t believe that it does a great job of looking back at previous chapters and making connections. I think conceptually, it would really help students if the book connected back to similar previous concepts and included more compare and contrast questions.
c. The important ideas are developed to require multiple approaches and assessments.
This curriculum very rarely offers multiple approaches for skills. In fact, I believe that there are several instances where they have made processes harder than they need to be, so often times I find myself teaching an alternative approach. Although I think it is good to know several approaches, I think sometimes this can be confusing. If I show students one way in class and they try to refer to the example in the book, it could be a little frustrating. Our book does offer a variety of assessments. There are short quizzes for almost every section (or every 2) there are mid-chapter quizzes, and there are about 6 versions of tests all in varying degrees of difficulty. Each chapter also gives an alternative activity to testing which is generally some sort of mini project. Also, the book comes with a CD of test bank questions, so if you do not like the tests you can edit them, as well as look through other questions for the chapter to add in.
2. Textbook resources are included to promote:
a. Mathematical modeling activities that promote connections to everyday life, society and the workplace;
Our curriculum does have several problem solving resources. Each section has a worksheet that is based on problem solving. There is also a Problem Solving Section in the back of the book that aligns to every chapter. The questions tend to be pretty good, however I don’t know that I would consider them modeling questions. In the beginning of each chapter there is a “Why?” question in all of the student textbooks. The question is there to help students understand where the skills from the chapter can be used in real life. In the teachers edition there is a chapter project based on the “Why?” question and these tend to be pretty good modeling activities. As noted above, there is also the alternative test activity as well.
b. Mathematical practices as a continuous method of doing mathematics; and
Each Section in our curriculum has a chunk of problems that are called “HOT” problems (higher Order Thinking). I think these questions do a fairly good job at addressing many of the mathematical practices standards. However, being that there are not many questions in the “Hot” problem sections, I find myself choosing only a couple of them. It would probably be better if I addressed them more often.
c. Multiple methods of formative and summative assessment aligned with the common core standards.
The only standards that the book mentions are the NCTM standards. This book was published prior to the CCSSM so there is no formative or summative assessments that would be aligned to them. However, I do know that when we were going through our adoption process Glencoe provided us with information specific to the Washington State Performance Expectations and where in the books each of the standards was located. Now that so many states are changing to CCSSM I am sure that they have already put together some sort of alignment with them. It might be beneficial for us to contact our Glencoe rep. and see if they have any information they can supply us with.
3. Easy to use documentation of alignment to the CCSSM.
Currently we do not have documentation of alignment, but as noted in previous question, I am sure it exists and we should look into obtaining it.