Hi Marcy,  Thanks for your question.  The Teaching Mathematics to Struggling Learners (TMSL) project grew out of an earlier professional development program, Making Sense of Mathematics and Teaching (MSMT).  MSMT focused on improving k-8 teachers' mathematics content knowledge for teaching and improving instructional strategies aligned with the Common Core Standards for Mathematical Practice.  While working with k-8 teachers in mathematics, we found that struggling students needed additional support.  The Teaching Mathematics to Struggling Learners program grew out of the recognition of the need for this additional support.  While developing the content of the program, we relied heavily on the Institute for Education Sciences practice guide, Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Response to Intervention for Elementary and Middle Schools.  We were really searching for ways to decrease the achievement gap in mathematics between students with Individual Education Plans and those without.

I just viewed your video with great interest!  Formative assessment and progress monitoring are important tools in supporting struggling learners.  While our work included some lower elementary teachers, for the MSP grant, we mainly focused on grades 3-5 and special needs teachers.  The focus of our work does align with OGAP, and I will be looking more closely at your website soon.  Thank you for reaching out! 

Beth-

Thanks for viewing!  Yes, we agree on the importance of teachers understanding student learning progressions.  Without this type of tool, teachers can feel lost.  They can struggle to hone in on where students are and how to move forward.  When they are equipped with knowledge and tools, teachers feel empowered to design instruction targeted to student needs.

Thank you for your thoughtful and productive work in this area. In OGAP we have grade 3-5 learning progressions and I would love to talk with you about how these 2 projects are similar and could benefit perhaps by each other. We see our learning progressions as tools for equity. I think your work is so important because, as a former special educator, I know there are just not many resources, supports and training for people who work with the most struggling learners in math. I hope we will have an opportunity to talk in the future. 

Beth,  We would be interested in connecting with you and learning more about your learning progressions tool.  Let's plan to set up a virtual meeting soon.

Yes...let's do that. It seems to me we have a lot in common and it would be really interesting just to talk about it.

Thank you for asking, Nadine!

Our professional development courses really honed in on three techniques: use of diagnostic assessment (we utilized the cognition-based assessment work of Michael Battista), implementation of effective intervention materials (we used both Marilyn Burn's Do the Math and Bridges Intervention Materials), and building special needs teachers' mathematics content knowledge and their confidence or sense of self-efficacy as effective teachers of mathematics.  Our instructional focus was on the students' 30 minute intervention time.

This professional development is based on the researched recommendations put forth by the Institute for Education Sciences practice guide, Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools., and specifically focuses on Recommendation 3 Instruction during the intervention should be explicit and systematic; Recommendation 4 Interventions should include instruction on solving word problems that is based on common underlying structures; and Recommendation 5 Intervention materials should include opportunities for students to work with visual representations of mathematical ideas and interventionists should be proficient in the use of visual representations of mathematical ideas.

While we don't make recommendations around universal instruction in this coursework, we do explain that intervention should be more explicit and systematic.  Much time was spent in development in deciding exactly what was meant by Explicit Instruction.  We believe it is critical that explicit instruction verbalizes thinking, illuminates decisions and makes connections between representations and strategies explicit to the student.

Thank you, Sarah.  This TMSL project was a team effort, and we all learned together.  The Waterloo Community School District teachers and coaches provided valuable feedback along the way, and the administration learned more about the work and supported the it in the classroom.

While we did not study change in perspectives related to the type of instruction students need specifically, but I am glad you asked about change in the teachers' perspectives, which was one of the most interesting findings of our evaluation.  We used the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument to measure change in teachers' beliefs about the effect of good instruction on student outcomes and on their own sense of self-efficacy.  As Connie mentioned below, both of these measures indicated growth when compared to a control group.  Interestingly, the teachers sense of self-efficacy shifted much earlier than their belief that improving instruction would impact student outcomes.  That surprised me.  Here's a link to the evaluation brief for the TMSL project:  https://tinyurl.com/ycqk5q64

You might see...

Teachers stating the expected learning of the lesson.

Teachers modeling proficient problem solving by verbalizing their thought process with a Teacher Think Aloud.

Students attempting to use the same thinking in pairs while they share that thinking with a Student Think Aloud.

Students attempting to use that same thinking independently while teachers provide corrective feedback.

Teachers using concrete, representational, and abstract models that help conceptualize the thinking process.

Student using those same models as their solve problems.

Teachers asking questions that help students generalize the learning past the specific problems they worked on so that students begin to transfer the learning.  

For a look into the classroom, and a demonstration of Explicit and Systematic Instruction, specifically IES Guide recommendations 3 and 5, read the description below and then check out portions of this video.

Mrs. Colflesh demonstrates explicit and systematic instruction.  Throughout the entire video she models verbalization of thought processes whil solving addition problems, and expects her students to do the same (IES Recommendation 3)  Watch this at about minute 16:15

She helps students make sense of the mathematics through two different visual representations, the hundred-chard and open number line, and is working towards the abstract representation of a numeric equation (IES Recommendation 5).  Watch at about 2:40 to see her helping students make sense of the problem on an open number line.

Nicole-

Thanks so much for the post.  I started my career as a middle school and high school teacher so it's great to hear from you!

This is difficult work.  What we found and research supported is that teachers need quality materials, quality professional development and onsite support. 

Do you have both diagnostic assessments AND intervention materials?  Our work was in grades 3-5, but there are good things available for your grade level too.  Would love to talk to you about the materials we have found valuable.  If you don't have additional intervention time, you may have to incorporate this things into your Core instruction, but could still be valuable.  Just getting really skillful at Teacher Think Alouds can be very powerful for struggling learners.  They don't always know how a proficient problem solver makes decisions.  They don't always know how to make connections.

Do you have access to professional development focused on struggling learners in mathematics?  Although reading is not the same as full PD, these is an IES practice guide that gives recommendations in k-8 that we used and in Algebra.  I find these helpful, but would need a colleague to help me put these into practice.

Do you have access to a on site coach?  Even if this person isn't a math specialist, their help in engagement and other aspects of instruction can be helpful.  

The last thing I would say is that there is really amazing research about Growth Mindset that could really help kids believe in themselves as learners.  I want every student to believe that they are capable learners!

Hope something from this post is helpful.  I appreciate your effort and perseverance in working through this challenge.  

We expect teachers to model specific strategies that they need their students to learn to move forward on a learning progression.  To be able to do this, teachers need to have a good idea of the strategy that they student is comfortable using and what strategy would be an achievable next step.  Too big of leap leaves the kids behind and encourages the student to try to just mimic what the teacher is doing instead of understanding the strategy.  This is why good diagnostic assessment is needed as well as strong teacher understanding of the learning progression.

Caroline,

Fortunately, in order to make the distinction between direct instruction and explicit instruction, we had  time to delve into the research.  Our MSP grant allowed us to take six months at the beginning of the funding period and really dive into the research as a team.  Our development team consisted of mathematics and special education university professors, consultants, coaches and teachers.  During the first six months of the project, we read research, and came together (weekly during the summer) to discuss the research, and to plan the PD. 

The Institute for Education Sciences practice guide, Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools, defines explicit instruction based upon the findings of the  2008 National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report.

We studied, modeled and asked the teacher to implement these specific practices in their classrooms.  Here is a short excerpt from page 21 of the IES guide:

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel defines explicit instruction as follows (2008, p. 23):

• “Teachers provide clear models for solving a problem type using an array of examples.”

• “Students receive extensive practice in use of newly learned strategies and skills.”

• “Students are provided with opportunities to think aloud (i.e., talk through the decisions they make and the steps they take).”

• “Students are provided with extensive feedback.”

Starting on page 48 of the 2008 National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report, you can find more of the foundational ideas upon which the TMSL program based professional development focused on explicit instruction.

Thanks for your question, Nancy.  We provided professional development for the TMSL four-course program over 18 months, and teachers were asked to implement during that entire time.  They video recorded themselves and received extensive feedback from colleagues, coaches, and facilitators as they implemented.  While we typically would like to see three years of support for implementation, the TMSL implementation phase was intensive we were able to see change in practice in that short time frame.

To evaluate the program, the external evaluator used the Concerns Based Adoption Method Levels of Use interviews, the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument, the Learning Mathematics for Teaching (Teacher Knowledge Assessment System, and a course evaluation survey to measure growth in the teachers.  

For a quick look at the results, check our our TMSL Evaluation Brief.