Meeting # 2―September 3, 2013
Based on the issues/interests seen as impacting student performance on the final exams generated at
the first meeting, five items appeared most frequently―alignment between curriculum, exams and
instruction; student placement, readiness, and options; purpose and weight of semester exam;
performance on formative assessments; and maximize instructional time.
The topic for the second meeting was alignment among exams, curriculum, and instructional practices.
Alignment review was shared with work group members who were asked to note their observations and
implications for recommendation.
To examine the rigor of the exam items the work group reviewed an item from the Algebra 1 Semester 1
exam and compared it to a sample item from the upcoming PARCC exam. They also compared items
from both geometry and honors geometry exams. Work group participants were able to see the level
of rigor of the PARCC assessment and compare that with the countywide semester exam and discussed
possible implications.
In the next segment of the agenda, work group members reviewed the Common Core State Standards
for Mathematical Practices to get a sense of the type and level of instruction required to achieve
proficiency across all areas of mathematics. They highlighted what stood out for them and how the
strategies were similar to, or different from, their experiences teaching and learning mathematics.
Participants were given a summary of findings from a study conducted by the Office of Shared
Accountability, entitled, Relating Instructional Practices in Mathematics to Student Success: Focus on
Math 7 for Grade 7 and were asked to note where they saw evidence of the Standards for Mathematical
Practices.
Implications for recommendations were collected for both the alignment review and the OSA Math 7
study for review and prioritization at next meeting.