In the progressions project we’ve been discussing how best to represent the standards for mathematical practice. The practices are signposted throughout the documents, but we’ve also been thinking about how to provide some structure for the practice standards that will help people avoid fruitless tagging exercises in their efforts to integrate the practice standards into the content standards. If you think about it long enough you can associate just about any practice standard with any content standard, but this sort of matrix thinking can lead to a dilution of the force of the practice standards—if you try to do everything all the time, you end up doing nothing. This diagram is an attempt to provide some higher order structure to the practice standards, just as the clusters and domains provide higher order structure to the content standards.
Search

Register or log in
Recent Comments
 Bill McCallum on Misconceptions about Multiple Methods
 Bill McCallum on Misconceptions about Multiple Methods
 Curricular Coherence Part 3: Using Deep Structures to Make Connections  Tools for the Common Core Standards on What Does It Mean for a Curriculum to Be Coherent?
 markovchaney on What Does It Mean for a Curriculum to Be Coherent?
 Al Cuoco on Curricular Coherence Part 2: Evolution from Particulars to Deep Structures
Categories
Archives
Hi Bill!
I have a quetion about how to present a double number line diagram for the following problem:
“the ratio of trucks to cars in the parking lot is 2:5. If there are 40 cars in the parking lot, how many trucks are there?”
I need to explain to administrators how to draw a double number line for this problem. I am pretty sure I know how to model and discuss it. But, I would like your feedback on how you would do it, and relate it to the Mathematical Practices.
Thank you,
Tracey