This is a pretty specific post. You’re all welcome to it, but it’s likely only helpful for Minneapolis Public Schools Advanced Algebra and Geometry teachers.
CONNECTING LEARNING TARGETS WITH MN STANDARDS: KEEPING RIGOR HIGH
I struggle to make sure I keep rigor as high as it needs to be based on standards. I read the actual standards at least once per year, but it’s easy to just fall back on the words in the Learning Targets (LT) themselves. Then I looked at the LT for Advanced Algebra and Geometry and was awed at how absurdly broad they are. I read the first unit for Geometry and laughed out loud.
I can solve problems and justify my results using geometric terms, notations, markings and constructions.
HAHAHA! So am I good if I get students to construct and label a square with right angles? Or do I need them to be able to construct a non-regular pentagon wherein they can label the circumcenter of any 5 triangles it can be divided into? There’s just too much ambiguity.
But these are meant to be student friendly LTs, so I turned to the standards and was blessedly given at least some relief. This exercise prompted me to be super annoyed at the number of papers in front of me, so I’ve tried to simplify it. Maybe these will only be helpful for me, but if you want them, they’re below. All taken from math.mpls.k12.mn.us.
In each, I’ve listed the MPS LT, and then below it, I’ve included the standards attached to those LTs for easy perusal throughout the year. (It’s helpful to know if one standard is covered in several places throughout the year.) They look roughly like this:
Maybe I’ll read the standards more often this way.
Enjoy and let me know if it’s useful for you. I’ve only done the first two units for each class, but I’ll do the rest when I have a spare hours throughout the year.
BONUS: ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL DESCRIPTORS
As a very necessary bonus, you should all have this doc handy, too. Your grade level is inevitably all of 2-3 pages long, and this has helped me get to the rigor that I need to based on semi-vague LTs.