Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Math Instruction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CUSD board sees hands‑on math lessons as coaches outline K–12 alignment
Summary
District coaches demonstrated interactive math learning experiences and described a multi‑year K–12 professional development program (EMP/AMP) intended to raise conceptual understanding and classroom routines; board members pressed for clarity on subgroup proficiency gaps.
Coaches and district leaders demonstrated a classroom‑style math lesson at the Dec. 11 Chandler Unified School District study session, using whiteboard activities and partner talk to show how students reason about inequalities and number‑line representations.
The demonstration, led by district instructional coaches and accompanied by a video from a local community‑college professor, was framed as part of a four‑year K–12 professional development pathway. Presenters said the program paired summer institutes, workshops, classroom observations and coaching follow‑up to create consistent instructional practices across elementary, junior high and high schools.
Why it matters: District staff said these instructional shifts aim to move students from memorized “tricks” toward conceptual reasoning, which administrators contend produces long‑term gains. The presentation tied the lessons to the district’s Portrait of a Learner and to Arizona Department of Education resources such as curriculum maps and the Connections for Success tool.
Key details: Presenters described two internal programs by name: EMP (Enhancing Math Practices) for K–8 and an AMP (Arizona Mathematics Partnership) pathway for secondary teachers. AMP participation includes a five‑day summer institute, recurring workshops and three classroom observations across the school year. The district said more than 1,000 teachers have participated in EMP coaching and that roughly 63 junior‑high and high‑school teachers engaged with AMP initiatives.
On results and evidence: District presenters cited AASA comparative data for grades 3–8 and a commendation from the ASU Helios Decision Center, saying CUSD “continues to outperform the state” in some measures. In response to a board question about the district’s 51% proficiency figure, an administrator said, “So, yes, in that space, we have 51%, which is better than the state,” and urged caution when comparing single‑year proficiency rates across differing cohorts and changing student populations.
Board discussion and equity questions: Board member Missus Serrano pressed staff on subgroup outcomes and provided ethnicity‑split proficiency figures — "Asian 83%, White 61%, Hispanic 33%, and Black 29" — asking what targeted steps the district is taking to raise performance for Hispanic and Black students. District staff acknowledged the gaps and pointed to universal design for learning, differentiated planning and continued coaching as part of their response; other board members cautioned that inter‑district comparisons require attention to differing school populations and Title I denominators.
What’s next: Presenters said the instructional changes are expected to show more measurable impacts over a multi‑year horizon (three to five years as teachers and cohorts move through the system). Board members were invited to submit follow‑up questions by email for additional data or subgroup analyses.
