MATHEMATICS EDUCATION FORUM

July 30, 2014

Math Ed Forum Meeting Minutes

Saturday June 20, 1998

(DRAFT) Minutes

Present:

Bill Allen, Ed Barbeau, Judy Crompton, Don Curran, Shirley Dalrymple, Gord Doctorow, Gary Flewelling, Gila Hanna, Peter Harrison, Bill Higginson, John Kezys, Bill Langford, Neal Madras, Melanie Myers, Eric Muller, Geoff Roulet, Peter Saarimaki, Evgueni Silaev, Peter Taylor, Cheryl Turner, Marg Warren, Walter Whiteley, Mike Wierzba

Regrets:

Kaye Appelby, Rob Corless, Gordon Dowsley, Lynda Graham, Mike Hamilton, Myrna Ingalls, Brendan Kelly, Mary Lou Kestell, Rob Long, Ken Marchant, John McKnight, Minoo, Nancy Moore, Jeff Schiffrin, John Rogers, John Vranch, David Zimmer

1. Welcome by Gary.

2. Introductions around the table.

3. Judy congratulated on her well-deserved Prime Minister's Award.

4. Agenda and minutes of May 2 meeting approved.

5. Discussion of Deliverable 1

Issues of Concern

Group brain stormed list of issues/concerns as follows:

a. undervaluing of geometric/visual emphasis
b. learning style issue (vs destination streams)
c. seem to have a lack of process indicators
d. overloading curriculum

e. mathematical representations - where are they?
f. what we write/how we write overall expectations
g. needs of students without grade 8 math
h. narrowness of vision of what math is
I. important that technical skill not "lead the parade"
j. calculus
k. assessment
l. academic/applied issues in grade 9
m. importance of course profiles and the limits/opportunities imposed/encouraged by curriculum policy
n. connecting math course
o. change vs status quo
p. recognize need for computers/computing

The following remarks/comments were shared and discussed:
need to build time for teachers to grow
calculus views: government putting more money into comp sci programs
... calculus vs discrete mathematics
... is calculus as important as in past
... what are the program requirements for univ admission
... more emphasis on discrete math, more direct tie to cs
... universities will have to make big adjustments with the loss of grade 13
... discrete math. description omits math/cs reference
... grade 12 discrete math course plus combinatorics and geometry should
be grade 11 course then everyone gets that, grade 12 that everyone gets
is modelling/analysis/functions
... never been convinced of teaching calculus in high school is right
... strong feedback at course menu stage by university people was that calculus
should be taught in high-school -if balance is there
... list of topics at course menu meeting had calculus already there - ministry
mandated calculus - engineering faculties want calculus
... who will need to take calculus then we can teach appropriately
... not unhappy with calculus as written but that it might play too large a role
... should some discrete/other stuff be earlier bits as well as in 12?
... visual forms - the ability to manipulate visual forms - not there at all
... discrete / numerical / graphing / more technology in whole calculus area
... can we put some discrete math in grade 11 and still do the kind of calculus
course needed/wanted in grade 12?
... overload already in grade 11 - would need to have another look at grade 11 structure
.... option of placing some analysis within grade 12 calculus course?
... and put some discrete math in grade 11?
... observation that image of calculus being necessary in the "world"
... "hard part of high-school math is calculus" to prove a world class curriculum
... calculus as written okay, but concern that grade 11 steers people away
from discrete math
... at grade 12 - math/sci - 2 courses ... calculus and one other
... Colleges View --- grade 9/10 good for college bound ---- grade 11 and 12 stuff would be redone in colleges ---11/12 useful but don't know if necessary --- this material is covered in first year college ---is calculus used as a filter ? - no
how is course profiles being developed? generated official ones by MET?
course profiles probably won't be as a RFP - profiles can be developed that would deliver "curriculum"
discrete math can't look like math for artsies
what role does the feedback panel play - how does process work? - judy described ...
is linear programming included - don't think so ...
3 dimensional analytic geometry - technology there - should we be doing it?
discussed delivery 1 and the "plain language" issue
word "model" doesn't mean much to community - word lacks clarity
at del 2 can we revisit del 1 and expand ?
proportional thinking, in grade 10 applied but not in academic; also in grade 12 college

After discussion, the following 4 groupings evolved:

1. What we write/how we write overall expectations
- lack of process indicators
- overloading the curriculum
- narrowness of vision of what math is
- important that technical skill not "lead the parade"
- importance of course profiles and the limits/opportunities
imposed/encouraged by curriculum policy
- change vs status quo

2. calculus and the connecting math course

3. -undervaluing of geometric/visual emphasis
- learning style issue (vs destination streams)
- mathematical representations
- recognize need for computers/computing

4. academic/applied issues in grade 9
- needs of students without grade 8 math
- importance of course profiles and the limits/opportunities imposed/encouraged by curriculum policy
- change vs status quo
- important that technical skill not "lead the parade"

Members of the MathEd Forum who want to provide feedback concerning Deliverable 1 must go through official sources. Below is a list of the organizations which are officially involved in the feedback process. You may route your feedback through an appropriate representative.

Organizations who will be in attendance at Feedback Panel meeting (July 4):

OAME
OMCA
Certified General Accountants Association
Ontario Federation of Labour
Organization for Quality Education
Ontario Parent Council
Institute for Catholic Education
ACAATO (Association of Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology of Ontario)
Council of Universities
Teachers for Excellence
OTF

Organizations profiding written Feeback:
- will fax feedback to MET, but not attend feedback panel meeting
Minister's Advisory Committee on Special Education
Ontario School Trustee Council
Ontario Catholic School Trustee Council
Ontario Association of Deans of Education
Ontario Federation of Home and School Associations
People for Education
Ontario Women's Directorate
Organization of Parents of Black Children
Canadian Alliance of Black Educators
Ontario Federation of Labour
Ontario Chamber of Commerce
Ontario Principals' Council
Catholic Principal's Council
Public Supervisory Officers Association
Catholic Supervisory Officer's Association
Secondary Students Association
Catholic Secondary Students Association
Toronto Board of Trade
Ottawa Board of Trade
Association of Independent Schools of Ontario

These following were the members of the Course menu group which should be approximately the same as the feedback panel. Some members may have been replaced by other members of the organization but this will give us starting contacts.

Sigi Barsauskas Fax 905-889-8083
Stewart Craven - OMCA - scrav@interlog.com
John Dallen - OAME - isicoli@yorku.ca
OAME website - http://www.mathstat.uoguelph.ca/oame
Jim Daly - Institute for Catholic Education - dubem@beta.edu.on.ca
Steve Halperin - University rep - hlaper@math.utoronto.ca
John Kezys - College rep - kezysj@operatns.mohawk.on.ca
Gary Reid - Quality Education - greid@interhop.net
Doug St Laurent - OTF - dlaurent@execulink.com

Note that Deliverable 2 is due on July 29, 1998.

NEXT MEETING: Saturday, August 8, 1998, 10:30 am to 2:00 pm

Next Meeting:
August 8 - 10:30 am (steering comm at 9:30 am)

14:00 Meeting Adjourned