(Approved on November 29, 2007)
Charles Munger, Chair
Glee Johnson, Vice Chair
Wendy Levin
RoseMary Parga-Durane
Becky Sullivan
Richard Wagoner
Lucy Medina
Mary-Alicia McRae, Commission Chair
Connie Tate
SMC Chair Munger called the Mathematics Subject Matter Committee (SMC) to order. The primary purpose of the meeting was as follows:
The committee discussed the use of a list of Consent Items to help facilitate the voting process for this adoption and agreed to use the a list of consent items at the September 26 meeting as an efficient way to recommend several programs with one vote.
To develop a Proposed Mathematics SMC Consent Items list, the committee separated programs into three main categories:
ntroductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here. Introductory paragraph of letter here.
The committee discussed how to consider information from any Commissioner who disagrees with, or has questions or concerns regarding the IMAP/CRP recommendations for any program. Chair Munger explained the Commission needs to consider adoption recommendations for 54 programs. He referred to a joint letter from himself and Chair McRae to all Commissioners that requests Commissioners to prepare an alternate Report of Findings (by September 20th) if they disagree with the IMAP/CRP recommendation. Some committee members expressed concerned about the tight deadlines, the request to submit an alternate report, and the fact that not all Commissioners were at the meeting to express any concerns. Chair Munger explained we are encouraging all Commissioners to share any concerns they have about any program recommendations as soon as possible. If a Commissioner can not submit an alternate report by September 20th (as requested in the letter), then they can bring the report to the meeting on September 26-28, 2007. At the next meeting, Commissioners will still have an opportunity to submit and consider additional new information. The committee recommended that alternate reports from Commissioners be submitted electronically.
Before starting the public hearing, Commissioners were asked to identify any programs they think need “Further Discussion” (e.g., they disagree with, or have questions or concerns regarding the IMAP/CRP recommendations for any program). Some programs were noted as needing discussion. Commissioners would be invited to explain their concerns later during the meeting, prior to public comment on the specific program.
The committee conducted a public hearing on IMAP/CRP Reports of Findings for the 2007 Mathematics Adoption. Public testimony was presented as follows:
Some Commissioners expressed concern with the program, including the areas of standards alignments, assessment, and universal access.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Steven Ritter, Carnegie Learning, Inc.
Tom Deliganis, Carnegie Learning Inc.
David Hart, Carnegie Learning, Inc.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Hope Bjirke, California Mathematics Council (CMC)
Brain Hoey, CPM Educational Program
Some Commissioners expressed concern with the program, including the lack of information for the point slope formula related to Algebra I Standard 7.0.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Marie Rives, Kinetic Books
Some Commissioners expressed support for recommending the program at all grade levels, include grade 6.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Jim Milgram, Stanford University
Joseph Brumfield, Pearson Prentice Hall
Some Commissioners offered both reasons to support and not support adoption of the program.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Joseph Brumfield, Pearson Prentice Hall
Stewart Wold, Pearson
Some Commissioners expressed support for recommending the program at all grades, including grade 5.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Ryan Galles, Teacher
Craig Scott, Wright Group
Amy Dillard, Wright Group
Public comment in support of the program:
Craig Scott, Wright Group
Some Commissioners agreed to review this program again before the next meeting.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Robert L. Collins, iLearn. Inc.
Some Commissioners agreed to review this program again before the next meeting.
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Robert L. Collins, iLearn, Inc.
Some Commissioners expressed concern with the program, noting a large number of errors.
Public comment opposed to adopting the program:
Hope Bjirke, CMC
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Kim Burnard, SRA
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Richard Levitt, Teacher Created Materials
Karie Gladis, Teacher Created Materials
Public comment in support of adopting the program:
Steven Ritter, Carnegie Learning
Tom Deliganis, Carnegie Learning
David Hart, Carnegie Learning
Chair Munger adjourned the Mathematics Subject Matter Committee Public Hearing on the 2007 Mathematics Primary Adoption for kindergarten through grade eight.
Committee members were assigned “homework” to complete by the
next Math SMC meeting on September 26, 2007.
Committee members were assigned to re-review selected programs (programs that Commissioners may disagree with, or have questions or concerns regarding the IMAP/CRP recommendations) and then draft an alternate Commission report for the program prior to the Math SMC meeting on September 26, 2007, if appropriate.
In addition, Commissioners were assigned to teams (3 teams of 2 individuals) to review publisher submitted tables of Edits and Corrections and to report their findings at the Math SMC meeting on September 26, 2007.
Commissioners discussed the review of the large number and volume of publisher submitted errata tables (up to 2,000 pages for some programs). They discussed the review and approval of errata tables and then agreed to establish page limits on the amount of errata a publisher may submit for approval. The committee directed CDE staff to send out a Publisher Bulletin requesting publishers to revise and resubmit their errata tables to meet these maximum page limits (no more than 10 pages per grade level for Basic and Algebra Readiness programs, and no more than a total of 40 pages for Intervention programs).
Chair Munger asked for any additional public comment.
In support of adopting Carnegie Learning Inc., Carnegie Learning Cognitive Tutor Algebra I, Gr. 8:
David Hart, Carnegie Learning
Steve Ritter, Carnegie Learning
In support of adopting Kinetic Books, Algebra I, Gr. 8:
Maria Rives, Kinetic Books
In support of adopting JRL Enterprises, Inc. (I Can Learn Ed. Systems), I Can Learn Fundamentals of Math, Algebra, Pre-Algebra and Geometry, Gr. 6-8:
John Lee, JRL Enterprises, Inc. (I Can Learn Ed. Systems)
Gretchen Muller, CMC, offered comments on CST test items, the impact on textbooks, and the fact that some standards can not be tested although the complete standard must be taught
Sheri Willebrand, CMC, thanked the Commission for the transparent process and for bringing CMC to the table for this adoption.
Chair Munger adjourned the meeting of the Mathematics Subject Matter Committee.