Dear Matt,

Being new, I have been asked to be on the textbook selection committee. What should I look for in choosing a text? How does our committee go about finding the best textbook series for our building and district?
Willing but Uncertain

Response:

Dear Willing but Uncertain,:

Congratulations! It is an honor to be selected for this important work, and can be a great learning opportunity for you. Your fresh viewpoint can be an advantage to the whole group. Sometimes those of us with more teaching experience struggle to move beyond our previous approaches.

For the sake of this piece, let’s call this committee the district curriculum committee, since usually the group with this designation has broad K-12 responsibility, more than simply selecting one or more textbooks. Even the task of selecting text materials is not so simple, given the fact that in many cases online resources and supplemental materials are available. By curriculum here we mean a set of related courses and their content that together constitute a K-12 mathematics program.

Since Minnesota is a strong locally controlled state, there is no single common approach that applies to all districts. Every Minnesota district can determine its own process and criteria. So let’s outline an ideal situation, where a mathematics curriculum committee is carefully selected, and time and resources, both personnel and material, are set aside for the work of the committee.

Why is the work of this group so important? The ultimate choices and decisions made by the group will determine the daily tools for teachers and students for the next 5-7 years. In What Works in Schools, Robert Marzano, after reviewing research on effective schools, concludes that the most important school-controlled factor for student learning is “a guaranteed and viable curriculum.” Guaranteeing the curriculum means that every Minnesota student will have the opportunity to learn all Minnesota standards and benchmarks for the grade or course whether or not the topic is in the textbook. In defining the term “viable curriculum,” Marzano connects viability to time. This means that for each learning goal, enough time must be allotted to that goal so that all students will have a real opportunity to achieve the goal. In other words, all the big ideas contained in the Minnesota standards and benchmarks must be addressed for all students (the guarantee), and enough time must be spent on each standard and benchmark so students can learn well (the viability).

Here are some components of a good process for a curriculum committee.

• Makeup of committee - A high quality committee will span K-12 and include representatives of all stakeholders: parents and other community members, higher education partners, broad representation from the teaching staff, including teachers of students with special needs and those who work with English language learners.
• Time - The most effective and thoughtful committees work over several years. The initial year should involve collecting data and examining research and current trends and issues in the field of mathematics education. After selection of materials, several additional years of teacher support helps to maximize effective learning.
• Study and background - Committee members should have a thorough foundation in state and national standards, current assessments, and their implications for the mathematics program. This study time includes learning about current research in learning mathematics, and trends and issues in the field.
• Data - Time should be spent collecting and examining all the data for the district by district staff or a subcommittee. This includes not only MCA data for all groups of students, but assessments that measure growth of students over time, and college admission test data such as PLAN tests and ACT reports. The latter give a good measure of the effectiveness of the K-12 mathematics program for all those students in the district that take one or both of these tests. Additional data may come from student, parent, and teacher surveys, asking for feedback on the impact of the current mathematics programs. Registration data on the number of students who continue to participate in mathematics classes at the 9-12 level, students accelerated and those asked to repeat courses provide measures of the quality and success of the existing K-12 mathematics program.
• Current status and future goals - The next step might be a synthesis of strengths and weaknesses in the current program, and goal setting for the future. This should flow from all the work done in the initial phases of study – data, surveys, trends, state and federal mandates and requirements. Even before considering any text materials, the district should have a plan for preparing and supporting teachers throughout a transition to new materials.

Now the committee should be ready to develop criteria for what they seek in new text materials. Part of this consideration involves deciding which criteria could be filled in other ways, and which are really needed in the materials. So, for example, some teachers may want lots of practice problems available. These are readily available in existing materials and worksheets. Some teachers may be looking for rich tasks that will engage students intellectually in mathematics. Such tasks are harder to find, especially those that reveal the mathematics without overwhelming students, so this may be something to have as a priority for new materials. In attempting to deliver the algebra in the Minnesota 8th grade standards, some districts may be especially interested in elementary programs that help lay a foundation for students’ algebraic thinking.

Here are some ideas to include in developing selection criteria:

• Alignment with standards – How well does the content of the materials align with Minnesota standards? Do the materials include sufficient content to allow enough time for all students to grasp the big ideas for the grade or course? Is statistics included in high school texts? Is algebra included in middle school texts? (No one program will be a perfect match to Minnesota standards, but the committee should look for close matches.)
• Balance of skills and concepts – since understanding requires both factual knowledge and a strong conceptual framework, does the program provide for connecting skills and concepts throughout? Does it focus on big ideas rather that disconnected procedures?
• Mathematical processes – Does the program provide an ample range of opportunities for problem solving, reasoning and proof, communication, representation, and making connections? These are well described in Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, the 2000 publication of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Depth without repetition – Many current programs are characterized by repetition. Does the new program provide sufficient depth on fewer topics for students to understand and retain the learning, relieving future teachers of the necessity of reteaching? When topics are revisited, is the depth of the treatment suited to the maturity of the students? Is there emphasis on fewer big ideas?
• Tasks – Do lessons provide rich tasks that will engage students intellectually in important mathematics? Are there multiple contexts for learning and applying mathematics?
• Transitions – Will students be able to make smooth transitions from one level to the next?
• Sense-making – Do the materials support students in making sense of the mathematics rather than simply teaching topics in isolation?

After the committee has developed a set of criteria, you will probably find a “short list” of promising materials for each level. Even if you will not be selecting materials for all levels at the same time, you should continue to plan for coordination and smooth transitions among the levels. When you have a short list, it is time to examine the materials thoroughly. An excellent way to do this is to pilot materials with students, to see how the materials “teach” and how students respond. There are many models for this, and care should be taken for the continuity of students’ learning. Nevertheless, it is difficult to make a thoughtful final decision by just looking at the pages. Real lessons in real classrooms are the best indicator of the strengths or weaknesses of a program.

After a final choice, the real work begins. Teachers need support prior to the school year, with the number of days determined by how different the new materials are from those previously used. They will also need support throughout the first several years in order to get the maximum value from the materials. Ideally, they will have teacher leaders available to support them, and will have opportunities to meet together throughout these next years to plan for the most effective instruction possible.

I hope this stimulates you to become engaged in this important and exciting work, and gives you some idea of what a good process might look like. As a committee member, please advocate making your district’s committee the best! Feel free to show this to district leaders. And good luck!

Matt

Matt Mentor, a wise and experienced teacher, offers advice about teaching mathematics topics to beginning teachers. Of course, experienced teachers can join in as well.

Here’s how it works:
Matt will respond in Math Bits to a teaching question posed by a reader. Other readers who have different suggestions or alternative answers to the question are invited to submit their replies to Matt who will post them to this page on the MCTM website.

Send your answers to MattMentorMCTM@aol.com and Matt will post as many different solutions that adequately address the question as are received.

Have a Question for Matt?
Send your questions about teaching math topics to MattMentorMCTM@aol.com and watch for Matt’s response in the next issue of Math Bits.