Question: Our school district has just officially adopted Investigations. Implementation will begin next year. What should we be thinking about and planning for in order to successfully implement Investigations, particularly in terms of professional development?
Answer: The Investigations Implementation Center's 3-day Level 1 Implementation Institute: Planning for Professional Development and Leadership Development is designed specifically for this purpose -- helping schools and districts develop an implementation plan best suited to their particular needs and circumstances. Implementation Center staff are also available to consult and advise (over the phone and email) schools and districts who are planning to implement Investigations. A conversation (or several) with Center staff is often a good starting place, and can enable a school or district to be ready to make the most of the experience at the Implementation Institute.
Important Background Information
The problem with a question like this is that every school or district is different. Therefore, what will (or won't) work tends to differ from place to place. For example, a district that has used a traditional text book for many years is likely to have very different needs than one in which teachers have been designing their own curricula using a variety of reform-based replacement units (such as those by Marilyn Burns) and investigations they have designed themselves. A district of just one or several elementary schools will require different kinds of support structures and a different timeline than a large urban district with over 80 schools.
In order to design an effective implementation plan for a particular school or district, Implementation Center staff ask about factors such as the following:
- How large is the district? What will be the scale of the implementation? How many schools, teachers, and students will be involved? What sort of support staff is already in place? Is there a curriculum or mathematics specialist? Are there teacher leaders? Can all teachers be reached at once or is that unrealistic, impossible and/or not desirable?
- What are the demographics of the teachers, and the community that they serve? Is this a district of veteran teachers or of many young/new teachers? Is there a high rate of turnover of teachers and/or students? Are there many teachers and/or families whose first language is not English?
- Is there important history or background, such as a new superintendent or the turnover of many principals? What is the district's culture? What are its goals and priorities? What do people believe about teaching and learning in the district? How is professional development for teachers viewed -- by administrators and by teachers? Is a change of curriculum considered a process of math one year, [science] the next?
- What money is available for supporting the implementation of a new curriculum, and for how long?
- What curricula were used previously? What support did teachers receive in their use? Why did the district decide to choose a new curriculum?
- What was the process by which Investigations was chosen? Who and how many were involved? Was there a pilot? Did teachers receive any professional development as part of this process?
What's Crucial?
Although districts will differ in many of the particulars of an implementation plan, we have learned that several factors are crucial for achieving successful implementation of Investigations across schools and districts. These include:
- A strong leader, with a vision and a team. Someone -- for example, a mathematics coordinator or an assistant superintendent -- must be clearly designated by the district to be in charge of the implementation. This person creates and implements a long-term vision for the implementation schedule, professional development, leadership development, and education of principals and families about the new mathematics curriculum. The leader needs a supportive team -- for example, a group of teacher leaders -- who help plan and carry out the implementation. As the implementation proceeds, members of this team may take responsibility for certain aspects of the work.
- A long-term implementation plan. Most schools and districts who have implemented a new curriculum that embodies the NCTM Standards find that full implementation takes about three years. Implementation of a curriculum like Investigations involves long-term, sustained, and coherent professional development. Although any plan will be revised to meet changing needs and emerging issues as the implementation evolves, a 3- to 5-year plan (which, ideally, includes the year before implementation begins) for professional development, education of stakeholders, and assessment should be developed at the outset.
- Leadership development. Successful implementation depends on a system-wide cadre of expertise that provides support to teachers. The larger the district, the larger the need for people who can lead teacher workshops, provide advice and assistance for teachers during their first year of implementation, offer professional development courses such as Relearning to Teach Arithmetic and Bridges workshops, and provide coaching. This leadership can include full-time coaches as well as classroom teachers, each with particular roles. The implementation plan includes support for these leaders' ongoing professional development and for continual efforts to identify new potential leaders. In addition, it is critical to identify leaders among principals and involve them in the education and support of their peers.
- Early and systematic information to all stakeholders, particularly parents and families. Parents and other family members need to have information and opportunity to support students' mathematics learning. They want to understand the new math curriculum, what is expected of their children, and how to provide help at home. Bringing parents and community members into the process of selection and implementation builds support and collaboration and can help counter misinformation about the changes in mathematics teaching and learning.
An Effective Implementation Plan
Given everything stated above (including all the caveats!), an effective implementation plan might look something like this.
- An Implementation Plan. The school or district sends a team to the Level 1 Investigations Implementation Institute: Planning for Professional Development and Leadership Development. This Institute explores issues of implementation, reviews staff development materials, and engages participants in model professional development sessions. It also provides the opportunity to interact with other districts from across the country and to consult with Implementation Center staff. The team should include experienced teachers, teacher leaders, staff developers, curriculum coordinators and other administrators who play lead roles in supporting classroom teachers and deciding upon, planning for, and carrying out professional development.
A big part of the work of an Institute is for the team to develop a multi-year plan for implementation. For example, will the implementation start with certain schools? Grade levels? Teachers? Units? Some people begin with (volunteer) schools or teachers who are already working on or interested in mathematics. Others begin with one grade level and add other grade levels in later years. Others ask all teachers to start with some number of units, and more units are added over the course of several years. (In this model, some districts decide to begin with a certain strand, i.e. data, and take on other units/strands in later years.) Deciding on a model for implementation is often dependent on such factors as background, staff and finances. Can we afford to buy all of the curriculum and necessary materials at once? Do we have enough staff and expertise to support teachers at every grade level in our first year?
- Developing Leadership/Building Capacity. The district develops a plan to identify, develop, and support a group of math teacher leaders/specialists/coaches, and decides what their work will be.
Depending on the selection process, these might be teachers who have piloted or used the units and dialogued with colleagues about them. Professional development for this group might include a Leadership Workshop. This workshop introduces participants to issues of facilitation as well as many of the useful resources available for supporting teachers in the midst of changing their mathematics teaching practice, and in which the district may want to invest. (Another useful professional development experience might be taking and learning how to facilitate a Developing Mathematical Ideas seminar.)
Again, whether these people will be math specialists/coaches/staff developers, Teacher Leaders who are full or part time classroom teachers, or some other position will depend on the particulars of the school or district. Those particulars will also determine the work they are able to do, which might include any/all of the following, at the district, school, or grade level:
- more informal support such as answering questions and offering suggestions to colleagues newer to the curriculum
- leading workshops for teachers, from unit- or grade-level-specific workshops to strand workshops that span grade levels (geometry in K-2; fractions K-5) to more general topics such as assessment (see Bridges to Classroom Mathematics, below)
- offering parent nights
- facilitating study groups on particular topics (for example a particular book, or a challenging issue such as successfully reaching the entire range of students)
- offering seminars such as Relearning to Teach Arithmetic or Developing Mathematical Ideas (see below)
- working with teachers in their classrooms, which might include: observing and offering feedback, suggestions and support, model teaching, co-teaching, and/or planning with a teacher before, and debriefing together after, a lesson
The district should also consider investing in professional development resources to be used by Teacher Leaders in the kind of work outlined above. Possibilities include: Bridges to Classroom Mathematics, Relearning to Teach Arithmetic, and Developing Mathematical Ideas.- The Bridges materials offer sixty 2 and 3-hour professional development sessions some of which address more general topics in mathematics and pedagogy. Other sessions are specific to the Investigations (or Everyday Math) curriculum, including sessions that introduce teachers to/guide them through any individual unit (unit guides).
- Relearning to Teach Arithmetic is a video-based professional development package that offers six (addition and subtraction) and eight (multiplication and division) 1.5 hour sessions to help teachers think critically about how their students develop understanding of whole number operations.
- Developing Mathematical Ideas is a professional development curriculum grounded in written and video cases. Each module (Building a System of Tens, Making Meaning for Operations, Examining Features of Shape, Measuring Space in 1, 2, and 3 Dimensions, and Working with Data) provides material for an 8-session seminar of 3 hours per session.
- Professional Development for Teachers. The district works with Investigations Workshops to offer an Investigations in the Classroom workshop for teachers. A plan is also put in place for school year follow up, offered by the Teacher Leaders (see above).
- Scheduling. The district builds in the necessary time for a successful implementation -- time for at least 1 hour of math a day, and time for professional development. (Will professional development happen during in-service days? as a part of the school day? After school or outside of school time? Will it be voluntary or required? Paid or not?) Many districts also find it useful to develop a schedule for which units will be taught, and on what timetable.
To reinforce the timetable, professional development opportunities can be planned for the end of each time period -- perhaps sharing and discussing student work from the assessment at the end of the first unit, and an introductory workshop designed around the second unit in the sequence.
This encourages teachers to stick to the schedule, helping avoid a common first year issue: getting very bogged down in one unit. This often happens as teachers wait for mastery and/or supplement the unit with other material, because they do not yet have a sense that these ideas will be revisited and expanded on over the course of the year. It also helps them get through more material in their first year, with support. Teachers often say the second year feels much easier, because now they have a sense of the units, where ideas first come up and where they are revisited, how the year unfolds and flows over time, and what to expect.
- A Plan for Year 2 and Beyond. Possibilities include a Building Computational Fluency, Relearning to Teach Arithmetic, DMI seminars, and strand or issue-specific work on topics such as the range of learners, writing in math, assessment, or having mathematical discussions (as opposed to mainly unit-specific work). Keep in mind, though, that in many school systems, and particularly in big systems, there are people who need Year 1 type of offerings for each of the first few years. Also any system with high teacher turnover needs to continue to have systems for bringing new teachers on board -- whether new to the district or new to the grade level.
- Other Stakeholders. The above applies mainly to teachers. There should be parallel plans unfolding over the years for:
- administrators (possibly using a curriculum such as Lenses on Learning).
- parents and families (see Murray, Megan. Schools and Families: Creating a Math Partnership. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman, 2002.) and other community members.
- other stakeholders such as special education teachers, aides and assistant teachers, and after school teachers, although ideally these people would be included in the professional development suggested above.
Megan Murray and Susan Jo Russell, TERC
With thanks to many Investigations-related staff for comments and feedback
June 2002
This information was reprinted with permission of CESAME, Northeastern Univ., and the Educational Alliance, Brown University.
