 For this year, the district abandoned its normal textbookreview process and adopted the new engageny math modules sightunseen. (engageny)
 Engageny math is still being written; the district is downloading units as they’re posted to the web.
 The Engageny “modules” have not been fieldtested. Irvington teachers and children are first adopters &, thus, are serving as test subjects.
 Kids in higher grades (3rd & 4th) have gaps in their math knowledge because engageny & Math Trailblazers don’t match, but no one in the school can identify the children’s gaps, and no one has a plan to remedy the gaps.
 The district has never had a “scope and sequence” of knowledge and skills students learn in each grade, so administrators don’t know what the kids know — and they have no simple means of comparing engageny math to the math that children have been learning here.
 It was clear last Thursday night that administrators can’t fix the problem. None of them is expert in math; they don’t know what a proper sequence of math instruction is. Nor should they: no one can know everything about every subject. Normally “pedagogical content knowledge” (what to teach & when & how) is “purchased” when we adopt the best math textbook series we can find.
 The solution, for now, is to drop engageny (or delay its adoption) and replace it either with the old Trailblazers books or with an ’emergency adoption’ of Saxon Math, the single most teacherfriendly math textbook on the market. (Here’s the homeschool edition.) UPDATE 11/9/2013: Or, better yet, we should do an emergency adoption of Singapore Math. Engageny math is, to some degree, modeled on Singapore Math, but Singapore Math has been fieldtested and revised over many years’ time, and its Scope and Sequence can be understood by administrators, teachers, and parents alike.
 Any teacher (& any parent) can pick up a Saxon Math textbook and teach math today. I know this because I chose Saxon when I realized I needed to reteach my son 4th grade math. I hadn’t taken a math course since college, and I successfully used Saxon immediately to teach my son and reteach myself.
 An emergency adoption of Saxon would mean that this year serves as the pilot of Saxon; next fall the district could pilot Singapore Math (& perhaps engageny math, if we have good word on engageny from other districts).
 Other children, in other districts, should serve as test subjects for engageny math, not ours.
 For the time being, we can’t worry about the new Common Core tests. We have Trailblazers kids in a Common Core world; that’s the reality. (If we had Singapore Math kids — real Singapore Math, not Dobbs Ferry Singapore Math — in a Common Core world, things would be different. But we don’t.) The state requires kids to take the tests, and that’s fine: we should treat the results as information about gaps and proceed from there.
 We have $2.16 million dollars in the fund balance to use for ’emergencies’; this should be seen as an emergency. Once kids develop gaps in math, it is very difficult for them to catch up to peers who have had a coherent math education. Our family knows this from direct personal experience.
Just back from the Common Core meeting at Main Street School tonight.
One factoid that leapt out at me: the price of a new K5 math textbook series, RK reported, is roughly $100K. That is the reason, she said, or a reason, we do not have math textbooks. Normally, at this point in the cycle,^{*} we would be vetting published textbooks, piloting them in the classroom, and choosing the one that works best, but not now, not with Common Core.
Today we’re using the free “math modules” being posted on engage^{ny}, downloading each module as it’s posted. The math modules are new, so new they are being written as we speak. They have never been taught by a teacher, or fieldtested with a child. But they are free, and they carry the Common Core brand, so we are using them.
The ancient tradition of textbook adoption and 10year textbook adoption cycles is gone with the wind.
Meanwhile we have over $2 million dollars sitting in the fund balance, as the district’s auditor confirmed three board meetings ago. The sum in the IUFSD fund balance, he said, is the “maximum allowable under the law.”
(He also mentioned that the law did not require an audit of our federal funds because we received less than $500K from the federal government.)
So. $2.16 million in the fund balance and we’re downloading neverbeforetaught math modules from the internet because they’re aligned with Common Core and they’re free.
Meanwhile Singapore and Saxon Math have been around for years, have been extensively fieldtested, and have at least some reasonably sound data to show their effectiveness. And the Singapore series (Primary Mathematics) is universally endorsed by real mathematicians, as opposed to “math educators” (the term of art in edschool precincts). Singapore Math may be the best math curriculum available in the English language.
For $100K Irvington children could learn math from the best math curriculum in the English language, or, for $0 Irvington children can learn math from engage^{ny} math modules the district downloads from the web.
We chose Door Number 2.
Here’s a question.
If we did not have a Curriculum Director, would we have math textbooks?
Would classroom teachers, acting on their own, choose to teach math without a textbook?
I don’t believe they would. Teaching math from packets is as hard as learning math from packets, or can be. I know because I teach grammar and writing from packets. My students need a good textbook, and so do I.
But education schools dislike textbooks, which they see as oldfashioned, sageonthestage affairs, and curriculum directors are trained by education schools.
Untested math modules on the internet are “21st century” (a compliment in the education world), just like the position of “Curriculum Director itself,” which, like the math modules, did not exist at all in days gone by.
BUT!
We’ve still got timed worksheets, which is more than most districts can say. And we’re going to continue to have timed worksheets: RK mentioned “fluency” several times. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the concept of fluency incorporated into other subjects: a very good idea. We desperately need to give kids fluency in reading and writing (something I’m working on myself in my own teaching).
Things could be worse. (See, e.g.: Dobbs Ferry)
UPDATE: “Fluency” = “automaticity.” Both words describe actions — and “thoughts” — you can perform rapidly, accurately, and largely or entirely outside of conscious awareness.
People who are fluent in a skill or area of content are fluent. This is why the requirement that children “explain” how they reached their answer in math is so wrong. Very often, a student who is really good at math just “gets it” without having to resort to effortfilled, conscious reasoning. When you force that student to “explain his reasoning,” you force him or her to “translate” his correct answer into words; you force him or her to function in the way a less talented student does.
Contra RK’s assertion last night, in the real world, NOT having to “think” is the goal. We need to acquire sufficient knowledge, and sufficient “automaticity” in our knowledge, that we look at a problem and know.
We should save thinking, which is tremendously effortful and rapidly drains mental resources, for advanced questions, and strive for fluency in everything else.
Fluency is reached through knowledge stored in longterm memory.
^{*} UPDATE 10/26/2013: A friend reminds me that we do not have a 10year textbook adoption cycle, as mentioned during the presentation. We have a 3year curriculum cycle (or curriculumreview cycle). The 3year cycle, as I recall, does not require that we change textbooks; we revisit textbook choices and review.
AND SEE:
• Fund balance could pay for $385K administrative offices
I say “substantially” because the math gap between Chappaqua and Irvington may not be statistically significant. Hard to say.
(My statistician friend says that the enormous gap between Irvington & Dobbs Ferry is large enough that we should assume statistical significance there. For Dobbs to adopt the best math curriculum in the English language and produce results that poor — not good.)
This is wonderful news. Wonderful. I’ve read the sample questions for 8th grade, and I’ve had a child go through the middle school accelerated math track back when it was far more accelerated than it is now (at least, according to what I picked up at a BOE meeting a few years back).
My impression: many if not most students taking algebra that year would have had difficulty passing this test.
Of course we want everyone passing the test (or at least 90% of all students in the class) — and we can get there.
District  Gr 8Math.  Gr8ELA 
% scoring 3 or 4 
% scoring 3 or 4 

Chappaqua.  75%  71% 
Blind Brook.  70%  71% 
Irvington  68%  57% 
Briarcliff  68%  75% 
Byram Hills  68%  74% 
Yorktown  67%  57% 
Bronxville  65%  66% 
Scarsdale^{*}  61%  70% 
Bedford  53%  50% 
Dobbs Ferry^{*}  30%  58% 
^{*}Singapore Math
I attribute this improvement to 3 factors:
 At least 12 years of parent activism on the issue of math curriculum, math teaching, and math achievement
 The Parents Forum, which ended the era of oneway communication (administration/BOE to parents, but not parents to administration or parents to other parents beyond their circle of friends and acquaintances) and made it possible to keep the math issue alive from year to year, month to month, and even day to day (Here’s one of my favorites, from 2010: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/irvingtonparentsforum/conversations/messages/3000)
 Interim curriculum director Maryann Doyle’s decision to teach math facts to “automaticity” via timed worksheets
Worksheets were the magic. All “tool” and “component” skills must be learned to a criterion of speed as well as accuracy, and timed worksheets make that happen very quickly.
Mad Minutes are a student’s friend.
Click screen shots to enlarge
SOURCE: Student Performance Review – May 1, 2012
(please click on link for full report)
AND SEE:
• ELA scores – grades 38 & Regents (5/1/2012)
• ELA scores compared (5/1/2012)
• AP pass rates (5/1/2012)
• math scores (5/1/2012)
• math scores compared (5/1/2012)
• per pupil spending
• What do home buyers want?
AND SEE:
• ALL STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT POSTS
• INDEX of topics and posts
Click on screen shots to enlarge
from presentation: As of July, 2010, NYSED updated its definitions for achievement levels. %Lev1 is defined as “Below Standard”. %Lev2 is defined as “Meets Basic Standard”. %Lev3 is defined as “Meets Proficiency Standard”. %Lev4 is defined as “Exceeds Proficiency Standard”. See the NYSED web site for more information.
SOURCE: Student Performance Review – May 1, 2012
(please click on link for full report)
The Powerpoint doesn’t tell us how many students took Algebra/Trigonometry.
AND SEE:
• ELA scores – grades 38 & Regents (5/1/2012)
• ELA scores compared (5/1/2012)
• AP pass rates (5/1/2012)
• Math scores (5/1/2012)
• Math scores compared (5/1/2012)
• Per pupil spending
• What do home buyers want?
AND SEE:
• ALL STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT POSTS
• INDEX of topics and posts