Major Features of the Mathematics Curriculum Framework

The new Mathematics Standards for Tennessee exhibit more rigor. In constructing the new standards, teams of math teachers and professors from across the state synthesized national standards from several resources: the American Diploma Project Standards, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Focal Points (NCTM), National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), ACT Standards, and Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning Standards (MCREL). The development of these new Standards involved three stages: teams of teachers composed necessary content, the standards were reviewed and held up to the national standards by a different team of reviewers, and finally, they were proofed and organized into the form found on the Tennessee Department of Education website. Governor Bredesen commissioned the Standards Committees to develop a curriculum that will "ramp up" the mathematical education of all Tennessee students. There were several guiding premises. Among these are the following.

1. There is no redundancy in the content standards. If a concept is addressed at a grade level subsequent to its introduction, it must include deeper understanding, more complexity, wider application, or more rigor.
2. Every Tennessee student can learn more than he/she is currently learning and expectations are higher.
3. The Mathematical Processes must be addressed at every grade level and in every one of the Content Strands.
4. Appropriate use of technology (not to replace understanding and individual performance) will be addressed at each grade level.
5. All concepts in the standards of every grade level will be addressed in the classroom. The standards are streamlined to allow for greater depth of understanding and more facilitation with problem-solving and application.
6. When the P-16 Council developed recommendations for future graduates, it was with the understanding that existing teachers would receive the professional development necessary to allow them to be qualified to teach the mathematics of the new standards. We must be proactive in preparing our teachers for this eventuality while exposing them to the changes in the new standards. In the tables in this document, it can be seen how the WCS Curriculum Department and the FSSD Curriculum Department are informing teachers of the changes that will be meet in the transition year 2008-2009. It is hoped that teachers will be fully prepared to address the new standards while being cognizant that the TCAP of 2009 will address the former standards.

Organization of the New Standards

There are still five strands; two former ones have been combined and one new one has been added:

• Mathematical Processes - New Strand*
• Number and Operation - Content Strand
• Algebra- Content Strand
• Geometry and Measurement- Content Strand
• Data Analysis, Probability, Statistics- Content Strand

• Grade Level Expectations or Course Level Expectations
• Checks for Understanding
• State Performance Indicators

New Strand*: The Grade Level Expectations for the Mathematical Processes Strand are the same for grade bands K-8 and for 9-12. The Checks for Understanding and the SPIs differ at each grade/course level.

Elementary/Middle Grades K-8 Mathematical Processes Grade Level Expectations

High School Grades 9-12 Mathematical Processes Course Level Expectations

Notes on the Features of the New Tennessee Mathematics Standards

The Mathematical Process Standards should be embedded in the content standards to reap the learning benefits gained from attention to them. These standards exemplify best teaching practices in mathematical instruction and mirror the NCTM Process Standards:

• Representation: Students learn in different manners. Addressing content in multiple representations can incorporate differentiation as well as encourage engagement.
• Communication: Students' ability to elucidate their thinking both verbally and in writing informs instruction. Classroom discussions and writing activities focus attention to development of meaning for and appropriate use of mathematical language and mathematical notation.
• Connections: Making connections within the discipline, to other disciplines (especially, history of development of mathematics), to careers, and to the real world highlight relevance.
• Problem-Solving with Reasoning and Justification: These two almost inextricably intertwined. Students should have opportunity to practice both of these standards in theory as well as in application through rich tasks. Students’ lack of ability in these areas (as bemoaned by employers and higher education) is theprimary catalyst for the rewriting of the standards.
• Implementation of Technology and Modeling: Students need opportunities to make appropriate use of tools that foster discovery and facilitate the construction of mathematical concepts. Appropriate use of technology occurring at all grade levels involves more than using technology as computing tool.

1. Familiarity with concepts learned in previous grades is imperative so that students have the opportunity to
   • hone arithmetic skills, undergird algorithms with conceptual understanding, and apply those skills more inclusively in the system of real numbers;
   • revisit processes at a more sophisticated level and/or with more complexity;
   • apply previously learned concepts in grade level appropriate settings; and
   • revisit concepts while developing a greater depth of understanding.
2. Identification of concepts that will be addressed for mastery in the following grade/course in order to take
3. the opportunity to introduce any of those concepts that naturally succeed concepts for the current grade level.

1. Request assistance from district math personnel to provide content background at site-based professional development;
2. Work with the professional development coordinator to address teacher content needs prior to the school year 2009-2010 in all aspects of content: vocabulary, notation, processes, concepts, and applications.
3. Encourage math teachers to initiate vertical discussions among teachers of both lower and higher grades.
4. Streamline the curriculum to offer time for students to develop depth of understanding so that students finish a grade/course with conceptual foundations that lead to success in future math courses.
5. Act as a facilitator to provide effective instruction for standards-based curricula to provide discovery learning and student-generated construction of knowledge.
6. Allow time to plan differentiated instruction for content that is not readily addressed in the currently adopted textbooks.