Pilot unleveled math programs

In the pilot deleveling programs in math prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, which Paris said were largely successful based on overall positive feedback in exit interviews with students, Paris said the largest obstacles were connected to 9th graders already forming identities based on their levels.

“The biggest challenge that we faced was in the fact that it was a pilot, which underscores a reason why I think it’s imperative that we do this work. We did the pilot work in the spring, so students had already been in their levels for six months and at that point, students had cemented their identities; their mathematical identities were already very fixed,” Paris said. “There were some students who were so set that they were in a certain level and had a challenging time thinking outside of those parameters.”

Paris said he hopes to eliminate students’ tendencies of confining their mathematical identities to their level.

“We’re trying to flip that now and say, ‘You’re not an advanced student, you might be in Geometry Advanced, that’s the work you’re doing, or you might be in Geometry Honors, that’s the work you’re doing. It doesn’t mean you’re an honors Geometry student, those are different things,’” Paris said.

In the brief pilots, Paris said students already began to change how they thought about math and collaborate with other students.

“In working with other students who weren’t in their level classes, students really expanded the way they think about what a mathematician is, and so students who were in advanced saw that just because students weren’t in advanced, they could still do quality math work and be effective mathematicians. And even more so perhaps, students in college prep saw they could hang out with students in Geometry Advanced, and they could do the work and they could participate just as much as those students,” Paris said.

Due to the emphasis on collaborative learning in math classes, the pilot demonstrated the need to instruct students on working together inclusively and productively, Paris said.

“If we just throw kids in a group, and say, ‘Do this math problem,’ then the most vocal, strongest math student is going to dominate. That’s not going to help those students who perhaps need more time to do the problem,” Paris said.

In addition to considering classroom dynamics, Paris said a new program will possibly need to restructure student assessments, which the department learned about from the pilots.

“If we just give a traditional pencil-on-paper math test, those play into the strengths of students who currently are in our higher level courses and that’s not necessarily the only way to assess student understanding. Being smart in mathematics isn’t just being able to complete a series of ten problems in an hour, it is being able to communicate effectively about mathematics, to write effectively and to collaborate with your peers on mathematics,” Paris said. “As we build this program, we need to think about what we value as mathematicians, how we want our students to grow as mathematicians, and we need to match those values to the way we assess them.”