If you were asked to examine your practice, what would you keep, what would you toss, and what would you invent or re-imagine? In so many words our math department has been asked to do just that.
Adaptive challenges are difficult because their solutions require people to change their ways. Unlike known or routine problem solving for which past ways of thinking, relating, and operating are sufficient for achieving good outcomes, adaptive work demands three very tough human tasks: figuring out what to conserve from past practices, figuring out what to discard from past practices, and inventing new ways that build from the best of the past.–Adaptive Leadership
We’re deep in the muck trying to figure out how to raise student achievement and move students forward. We’re an upper middle class suburban district and our kids should be doing better. MAP is our yardstick. Like it or not that is the tool we use to measure growth.
Regardless of the yardstick, how do we move students forward? How committed are we to ensuring that student learning is maximized? We’re not super heroes, but what does it take (without killing the love of learning via excessive testing) to make sure students learn?
I’d like to limit the conversation to instructional decisions that are within our control. Besides a viable curriculum and the art of reteaching and reassessing, what else do you do? How do you differentiate for the capable student, but who is not ready to be placed in a higher track? Do you enrich or accelerate, and how?
I wrestle with these ideas as well as how to incorporate spaced vs. massed practice so the concept has a better chance of getting into long term memory.
What are the high leverage moves you’d recommend? I’m all ears.