Mini-Grant Project Summary
Implementing Problem Solving in Mathematics Instruction
Books study of the text,
TEACHING MATHEMATICS THROUGH PROBLEM SOLVING
Milwaukee Education Center Middle School
Participants:
Odell Ball – Math Lab,
Amarilis Cornejo – 6 & 7th grade Bilingual Math,
Sue Eisenman – Literacy Coach, Learning Team,
Stan Loper – MRP Math
th
Joan Neumann – 8 grade Math
Michele Rafferty – 6th grade Math
Objectives:
 Develop a professional learning community among math teachers centered on
professional literature and best practices. Build camaraderie and trust
among colleagues
 Teacher collaboration on problem solving lessons and tasks, best practices,
data driven curricular decisions.
 Successful implementation of problem solving in math instruction as
measured by improved CAB scores and increased efficacy in classroom
participation.
Procedure:
 Every member of the group was provided with a Teaching Mathematics
through Problem Solving text.
 A survey on problem solving in the math classroom was given at the first
meeting to gather information on what the participants thought it was, how
often they taught/used problem solving, and how their students responded
to problem solving.
 Weekly meetings for 1.5 – 2 hours each.
 Took three weeks to get participants to show up for our first meeting.
Because of this and other factors, we did not finish the book study
and are revisit it this summer.
 First meeting was organized around sharing ideas/reflections of the Preface
and Chapter 16 (supportive research).
 Following meeting agendas covered information on the conceptual and
historical background teaching math through P.S., appropriate tasks and
learning tools, and learning how P.S. would look in a classroom.
2/6/2016
1
Mini-Grant Project Summary
 Each member chose a chapter to read and share the following week. Key
ideas were discussed and often the springboard for discussions about
beliefs and teaching philosophy.
Outcomes:
 Improved mathematics instruction – not realized yet
 Increased student test scores – not realized yet
 Camaraderie and trust built among the math staff – realized
 Open / frank conversations on best practices and the need to develop them
(PLC?) – realized
Sharing / Reflecting:
 MEC has not had a consistent math staff in the past few years and
therefore the math teachers never quite “gelled” as a professional group.
Although we met about 2-3 times per month, the discussions were not
focused around professional literature/pedagogy or best practices.
 MEC has struggled in providing professional support for teachers to build
their math content knowledge.
 Difficult to get a group together after school with so many other meetings
already in existence and other obligations. Took three weeks to get our
first meeting to occur.
 Some people do not do their reading and then the group suffers.
 Mixed use of traditional vs. reform math series so that brings different
viewpoints/beliefs into the discussions.
 Pre- and post-tests fell by the wayside – Emphasize with participants/
students next year.
 I learned a lot about facilitating a book study and believe I can do better
when we continue with this next school year.
 We did not finish the book this spring and have further planning
to do in supporting this effort next school year.
Things Learned:
 Talk with staff individually face to face when trying to build
participation.
 Have food
 Start on time – do not wait for all to show, even if you know they are
coming.
 Develop book club “norms”
2/6/2016
2
Mini-Grant Project Summary
 Our math teachers like to talk!
 Get subs for release time during the day to work on book study
discussions.
 Organize the book study differently so each meeting is organized around
a certain topic or idea. Working our way through the book and each
person sharing may not have been the most successful.
 Develop some type of accountability for readings in addition to
discussion.
 When we revisit this in the fall, I would like to do a better job of having
participants incorporating ideas / implementing strategies in their
classrooms during the week. We did not do so explicitly this year but
know deeper understanding can come of this.
 I don’t think much changed in instruction this year but at least beliefs
have been challenged, fresh ideas have been shared and most
importantly, the purpose for instructional change has rung loud and clear.
We are in the infancy of great things.
 We did a lot of talking and sharing but now need to more working around
these ideas.
 We have been very successful in building relationships among
our math staff which will support the difficult job ahead of us
in the fall and through out the coming school year as we work
to implement problem solving as a strategy in mathematics.
2/6/2016
3