© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Shaping Talk in the Classroom: Academically Productive Talk Features.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Silicon Valley Math Initiative Professional Development Series
Advertisements

Common Core Mathematical Practices. People who are good in math… Make sense of problems.
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
Mathematics Instruction: Planning, Teaching, and Reflecting
Study Group 2 – Algebra 2 Welcome Back!
Standards for Mathematical Practice
Common Core State Standards K-5 Mathematics Kitty Rutherford and Amy Scrinzi.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Shaping Talk in the Classroom: Academically Productive Talk Features.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Algebra.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Academically Productive Talk in Mathematics: A Means of Making Sense.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Geometry.
Common Core State Standards in Mathematics: ECE-5
ACOS 2010 Standards of Mathematical Practice
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2012 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of.
Math Instruction What’s in and What’s out What’s in and What’s out! Common Core Instruction.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Selecting and Sequencing Based on Essential Understandings Tennessee.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Algebra.
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Selecting and Sequencing Students’ Solution Paths to Maximize Student Learning Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Selecting and Sequencing Students’ Solution Paths to Maximize Student Learning Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching.
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing.
Engaging Learners and Realizing the Development of Mathematical Practices ALM Conference July 15, 2015 Trena L. Wilkerson Professor, Mathematics Education.
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Academically Productive.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Strategies for Scaffolding Student Understanding: Academically Productive.
A CLOSER LOOK AT THE CCSS FOR MATHEMATICS COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS PRESENTED BY: BEATRIZ ALDAY.
K-1 TIPM3 Dr. Monica Hartman Cathy Melody and Gwen Mitchell November 2, 2011.
© 2013 University Of Pittsburgh Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing Questions to Target Essential Understandings.
© 2013 University Of Pittsburgh Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Making Sense of Numbers and Operations Fraction Standards via a Set.
K–12 Session 4.2 Standards for Mathematical Practices Part 2: Student Dispositions & Teacher Actions Module 1: A Closer Look at the Common Core State Standards.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Academically Productive Talk Moves: Orchestrating a Focused.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Strategies for Scaffolding Student Understanding: Academically Productive.
What does CCSS instruction/classroom look like? The task you select. The questions you ask. What Standards for Mathematical Practices do you see? 1. Make.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Selecting and Sequencing Based on Essential Understandings Tennessee.
Which of the following items must you consider when planning instruction in your class? Place a dot next to each item. UbD IFL/POL IEP/504/UDL ESL/SIOP.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing Questions to Target Essential Understandings.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Academically Productive Talk Moves: Orchestrating a Focused.
Elementary Math: Grade 5 Professional Development Fall 2011.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing Questions to Target Essential Understandings.
Beyond Slope and Points David Harris, Escondido USD/K12 Alliance Susan Gomez Zwiep, CSU Long Beach/K12 Alliance CMC Palm Springs Oct, 2013 Lesson Available:
T 3 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP Make sense of problems & persevere in solving them Reason abstractly & quantitatively Construct viable arguments.
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2012 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing.
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Algebra 2 Illuminating Student Thinking:
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2004 University of Pittsburgh 1 Principles of Learning: Accountable Talk SM Accountability to the Learning Community.
Insights About the Grade 1 Learning Expectations in the CCSS Topic #1: The meaning of the equal sign Presented by the Office of Curriculum, Instruction.
Effective Practices and Shifts in Teaching and Learning Mathematics Dr. Amy Roth McDuffie Washington State University Tri-Cities.
Vacaville USD October 28, AGENDA Problem Solving, Patterns, Expressions and Equations Math Practice Standards and High Leverage Instructional Practices.
USING VIDEO TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THE MATH PRACTICES LOOK LIKE IN K-5 CLASSROOMS.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Engaging In and Analyzing Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department.
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ACCOUNTABLE TALK ® IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Shaping Talk in the Classroom: Academically Productive Talk Features.
Standards for Mathematical Practice 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3. Construct viable.
509A UNIT 1-WEEK2 Dr. Hasan Fall Classroom Observation Unit 1 In your small groups, reflect on your observation of the classroom video lesson using.
NGSS and Common Core State Standards. Mathematical Practices Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
#1 Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them How would you describe the problem in your own words? How would you describe what you are trying.
PUTTING THE COMMON CORE MATH STANDARDS INTO ACTION Sandy Christie Craig Bowman 2012.
COMMON CORE STANDARDS C OLLEGE - AND C AREER - READINESS S TANDARDS North East Florida Educational ConsortiumFall 2011 F LORIDA ’ S P LAN FOR I MPLEMENTATION.
COMMON CORE STANDARDS C OLLEGE - AND C AREER - READINESS S TANDARDS North East Florida Educational ConsortiumFall 2011 F LORIDA ’ S P LAN FOR I MPLEMENTATION.
This module was developed by Margaret Smith and Victoria Bill at the University of Pittsburgh. Video courtesy of Pittsburgh Public Schools and the Institute.
This module was developed by Margaret Smith at the University of Pittsburgh. Video courtesy of Pittsburgh Public Schools and the Institute for Learning.
This module was developed by Melissa Boston at the University of Pittsburgh. Video courtesy of Hamilton County School District and the Institute for Learning.
This session is based on the module entitled, “The Case of Shalunda Shackelford and the Bike and Truck Task”, developed by Melissa Boston at Duquesne University.
Principles to Actions Effective Mathematics Teaching Practices The Case of Wobberson Torchon and the Calling Plans 1 Task Algebra I Principles to Actions.
Mathematical Practice Standards
Cultivating Math Conversation Through Questioning
Welcome to Day Three.
Listening For Accountable Talk
Presentation transcript:

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Shaping Talk in the Classroom: Academically Productive Talk Features and Indicators Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Algebra 2

Rationale Teachers’ questions are crucial in helping students make connections and learn important mathematics and science concepts. Teachers need to know how students typically think about particular concepts, how to determine what a particular student or group of students thinks about those ideas, and how to help students deepen their understanding (Weiss & Pasley, 2004). By analyzing a transcript of an Accountable Talk ® discussion, participants will consider the benefits to student learning when the Accountable Talk features and indicators are present in the Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase of the lesson. Accountable Talk ® is a registered trademark of the University of Pittsburgh.

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Session Goals learn about Accountable Talk features and indicators; and learn about the benefits of using indicators of all three Accountable Talk features in a classroom discussion. Participants will:

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Overview of Activities Participants will: analyze transcripts, identify Accountable Talk features and indicators, and consider the benefits of fostering this community; and plan for an Accountable Talk discussion.

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Accountable Talk Features and Indicators Read the list of Accountable Talk indicators related to each of the features.  Accountability to the Learning Community  Accountability to Knowledge  Accountability to Rigorous Thinking How do the features differ from one another?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Accountability to the Learning Community Actively participate in classroom talk. Listen attentively. Elaborate and build on each others’ ideas. Work to clarify or expand a proposition. Accountable Talk Features and Indicators

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Accountability to Knowledge Specific and accurate knowledge Appropriate evidence for claims and arguments Commitment to getting it right Accountable Talk Features and Indicators

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Accountability to Rigorous Thinking Synthesize several sources of information. Construct explanations and test understanding of concepts. Formulate conjectures and hypotheses. Employ generally accepted standards of reasoning. Challenge the quality of evidence and reasoning. Accountable Talk Features and Indicators

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Accountable Talk Discussion Turn and Talk with your partner about what you would expect teachers and students to be saying during an Accountable Talk discussion for each of the features. −accountability to the learning community −accountability to accurate, relevant knowledge −accountability to discipline-specific standards of rigorous thinking

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Indicators of all three Accountable Talk features need to be evident in a lesson. Lessons should be: accountable to the learning community; accountable to knowledge; and accountable to rigorous thinking. Why might it be important to have Indicators of all three features of Accountable Talk discussions in a conversation? Accountable Talk Features and Indicators

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Preparing for the Share, Discuss, and Analyze (SDA) Phase of the Lesson

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH The Structures and Routines of a Lesson The Explore Phase/Private Work Time Generate Solutions The Explore Phase/Small Group Problem Solving 1.Generate and Compare Solutions 2.Assess and Advance Student Learning MONITOR: Teacher selects examples for the Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase based on: Different solution paths to the same task Different representations Errors Misconceptions SHARE: Students explain their methods, repeat others’ ideas, put ideas into their own words, add on to ideas and ask for clarification. REPEAT THE CYCLE FOR EACH SOLUTION PATH COMPARE: Students discuss similarities and difference between solution paths. FOCUS: Discuss the meaning of mathematical ideas in each representation REFLECT: By engaging students in a quick write or a discussion of the process. Set Up of the Task Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase of the Lesson 1. Share and Model 2. Compare Solutions 3. Focus the Discussion on Key Mathematical Ideas 4. Engage in a Quick Write

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Triple Trouble

The CCSS for Mathematical Content CCSS Conceptual Category – Algebra 2 Common Core State Standards, 2010 Building Functions (F-BF) Build a function that models a relationship between two quantities F-BF.A.1Write a function that describes a relationship between two quantities. ★ F-BF.A.1bCombine standard function types using arithmetic operations. For example, build a function that models the temperature of a cooling body by adding a constant function to a decaying exponential, and relate these functions to the model. Arithmetic with Polynomials and Rational Expressions (A-APR) Understand the relationship between zeros and factors of polynomials A-APR.B.3Identify zeros of polynomials when suitable factorizations are available, and use the zeros to construct a rough graph of the function defined by the polynomial. ★ Mathematical Modeling is a Standard for Mathematical Practice (MP4) and a Conceptual Category, and specific modeling standards appear throughout the high school standards indicated with a star ( ★ ). Where an entire domain is marked with a star, each standard in that domain is a modeling standard.

The CCSS for Mathematical Practice 1.Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2.Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3.Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. 4.Model with mathematics. 5.Use appropriate tools strategically. 6.Attend to precision. 7.Look for and make use of structure. 8.Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning. Common Core State Standards, 2010

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Analyzing Student Work Use the student work to further your understanding of the task. Consider: What do the students know? How did the students solve the task? How do their solution paths differ from each other?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Group A

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Group B

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Group C

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Group D

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Group E 21

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Selecting Students’ Work The teacher selected work from Groups B and C for the Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase of the lesson. Consider the following: Why might the teacher have chosen these pieces of student work for this lesson phase? What mathematical concepts can be targeted by the teacher using the student work that s/he chose?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Analyzing Teaching and Learning Triple Trouble Task Vignettes: Two classrooms are solving and discussing solution paths to the Triple Trouble Task. Read a short transcript from Classroom A and Classroom B. What are students learning in each classroom?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Analyzing Teaching and Learning What is similar and different between the opportunities to learn in Classroom A and Classroom B?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH The Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase of the Lesson What made it possible for this learning to occur?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Which of the Accountable Talk features and indicators were illustrated in the transcript from Teacher A’s classroom? Accountable Talk Features and Indicators

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH The Share, Discuss, and Analyze Phase of the Lesson In what ways did students engage in an Accountable Talk discussion? What purpose did the Accountable Talk features serve in the lesson? 27

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Your Turn Consider the essential understanding below: The product of two or more linear functions is a polynomial function.The resulting function will have the same x-intercepts as the original functions because the original functions are factors of the polynomial. What would you need to hear from students to know that they had this understanding?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Your Turn At your tables, plan questions and possible student responses for a classroom discussion that will get at the essential understanding. How will you hold them accountable to the learning community, knowledge, and rigorous thinking?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Your Turn What did you notice about planning questions and anticipating student responses? What are some things you said and did to hold students accountable to the learning community, knowledge, and rigorous thinking?

© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Step Back: Reflecting on the Benefits What are the benefits of using Accountable Talk features and indicators as a tool for reflecting on the classroom discussion? For planning?