1. Rethinking Pre-College Math: A Brief Reminder about Why We’re Here and What We’re Trying to Do Overall context/purpose of project Defining characteristics of project Role of “common practices” Logic model (“theory of change”) Agenda walk-through

3. It’s About Equity, Not Just Math

4. Defining Characteristics of Project Collective approach, supported by department/program as a whole Addressing core areas of educational practice Taking an inquiry stance toward practice (emphasis on evidence) Collaborating in going to “scale”

5. Core Areas of Educational Practice We put an enormous amount of energy into changing structures and usually leave instructional practice untouched…We are attracted and drawn to these [efforts] because they’re visible and, believe it or not, easier to do than to make the hard changes, which are in instructional practice… Richard Elmore, January 2002, “The Limits of ‘Change’”

6. Taking an Inquiry Stance through Common Practices Use assessment data and structured exchanges to explore ideas that can be adapted and shared Emphasize evidence around student learning and instructional approaches Consider how new ideas, other resources and knowledge might be useful (as tools rather than “truth”) Adapted from Deborah Ball, 1994

7. “Scaling” the Work of the Project Common language, conceptual framework Shared experiences, exposure to multiple approaches/methods Forum for sharing resources and practices Scale at the organization level means, are people working in concert around a set of ideas about what curriculum and pedagogy should look like, and is it obvious in their practice? Richard Elmore, “Improvement of Teaching at Scale”, January 2006

8. Logic Model: Rethinking Pre-College Math Program assets/ College context Student Success/ achievement Faculty Inquiry Groups Classroom Assessments Classroom Exchanges COMMON PRACTICES

9. Inquiring Around Data  What inferences, hypotheses might we draw from these data? What might be some of the factors contributing to what we see in the data?  What other evidence (quantitative, qualitative) would we want to gather to help us understand and use these data?  How might we use the “common practices” defined in the project to understand and improve these results?  Reflect as a team on the benefits and challenges of having this discussion around data like these with a broader group of department colleagues rather than just our team— what would we need to reproduce this discussion back at our college? NOTE: Use the same roles as defined in the earlier session but switch the assignments.

10. What the Research Literature Says about Key Elements of Successful Professional Learning Communities The collegial and facilitative participation of departmental leadership and key faculty A shared vision that is developed from a focused and sustained commitment to students' learning and that is consistently articulated Collective learning among staff and application of that learning to solutions that address students' needs Classroom visits and peer exchanges as a feedback and assistance activity to support individual and community improvement Structural arrangements and human capacities that support the elements above

11. What Faculty Inquiry Groups Do Create professional communities in which educators can share what happens in classrooms Articulate and negotiate the most important outcomes for student learning Use the tools of classroom research to understand the experience of students more deeply Share insights and findings Examine a wide range of evidence, from examples of student work to campus-level quantitative data that describes patterns of student performance Invite, and offer, critical reflection and peer review Collaborate in the design of curriculum, assignments, and assessments Build trust as an essential component of ongoing improvement Support professional identity and responsibility among educators SPECC Windows on Learning: “Faculty Inquiry Case Studies”