Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Teachers, union and advisory members say district moved too quickly on switching math pathways
Summary
Secondary math teachers and union representatives told the Murrieta Valley Unified board they were sidelined when the board signaled a move from integrated to a traditional math sequence; teachers want the advisory committee reconvened and the decision postponed until middle-school voices and consultant data are shared.
Several teachers and the Murrieta Educators Association criticized the district's handling of a proposed return to a traditional math pathway, saying the decision emerged publicly before teachers and the secondary math advisory committee had a chance to review consultant findings and data.
Teacher Jameson Lee Resignol asked the board why the advisory group had not been allowed to weigh in and urged the trustees to consider a 50‑50 vote to keep debate open. He said the consultant referenced by staff and in board communications, Dr. Sorensen, had not met with teachers and that the report the board cited had not been shared with classroom educators.
"If we have some data to back up that claim, I'm all in," Resignol said, urging transparency about what data supported the change.
Lisa Murray, president of the Murrieta Educators Association, said she walked into a meeting of frustrated math teachers who learned about the change via a board member's social media post. She emphasized that switching pathways rearranges the order of standards but does not change California Common Core standards themselves and proposed pausing the adoption and bringing the issue back to advisory with middle‑school representation.
Board members acknowledged concerns about process and said the board had sought an external review of math performance to inform decisions. President Pardue said the board's intent was to review data to improve student outcomes and that the consultant was asked to "provide another perspective." He said if the advisory committee wishes to reconvene and reach consensus, the board would consider that input in timing for adoption.
The discussion did not produce a formal vote on curriculum adoption at this meeting. Multiple speakers asked staff to provide the consultant's report and the specific data the board relied upon; trustees asked staff to follow up.
Next procedural steps noted in the meeting: staff to share the referenced consultant material and consider reconvening the secondary math advisory committee with middle‑school representation; the board will await advisory recommendations before final curricular adoption.
