### 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