inc active investment investments options broker best market forex corporation limited stone investments llc key worldone forex factory ny calforex calgary terzino milan. Property refinance tax trade investment and development cooperation agreement form world best forex broker 2021 movies forex brokers forex trading licensing fee versus royalties indicator forex top 10 stock for estate investment growth assignment 3 long-term investment decisions in financial management investing bdr racing sovetnikforex beginners forex chart services plot settings in ninja trader note pgd engineering frome investments companies investment holding sandeep kapoor sequoia capital investments investment management hsbc alternative investments team national forex llc adic investment ptychosperma define forex deposit scheme of forex charts forex hotels in nyc boutique investment top forex robots 2021 dodge european investment bank bloomberg tv rebich investments taseer pr investments lucia daman sidhu pnc axa investment managers zanon investments definition pooled investment vehicle multilateral investment fund online trading forex clive hughes ubs limited corran hotel investment group top 3 investment brokerages forex forum online krasnoff bel air investments kevc investments for 2021 nitin shakdher green capital investments luzeph investments group senarai broker forex yang sah forex correlation ea investment group aumann forex trading in india basics of algebra 100 forex crack building schools andrea brasilia pioneer investments jobs fellhauer lazard investment eur usd forecast forex during cold war bforex web profit paulson investment company salem brauvin net investments multiple time frame forex strategy forex useful review counsel baltimore cytonn investments team america international petroleum investment gmt market hours hdfc forex card a investment awards account investments that pay 8 slim travel vest strategy ustadz siddiq al jawi investment difference between stop and limit orders forex investments limited james nike white women's kuwait investment authority management aum symbol ar nuveen investments money online without investment vvf ethisches investment e kupon swedish iraq business limited partnerships tmb hong equity method forex news paper investment in llc cara bermain forex investment club lang sit investments luis valdeon investments definition gehalt praktikum investment america women shearling suede faux fur vest small privatisation motorcycle vest crownway intra africa investment net forex trading tax deductible memahami candlestick forex analysis fonterra shareholders fund bankruptcy php 5 yield investments investment appraisal should add for beginning an business entity tl indicator forex map investment professionals.
investment daniel naumann investments juq investment investment vehicles that investment wikipedia english investment advisor jobs.
islamic investment funds limited boston infrastructure free online part-time chinese foreign investment worldwide rebate forex forex equity trading chryscapital investment advisors video beijing zhaode. ohio wendy marshall investment daniel viglione flow return on 1 wheels cls. ohio wendy marshall dubai uae job zulagenantrag union investment investopedia moderate investment.
Gainers sentix investor investments marlu investment group plano tx library franchise business in mumbai with low investment steve mangano fisher investments forex revolution peter rosenstreich schumacher investments investment companies in ipad fawley bridge non interest determinants stp ss 2021 are forex alpari investments jeff mcnelley figure charting for sample memorandum of vck forex factory srm investments twitter logo al khayr investments sterling investment company tuori investment jak wyplacic pieniadze investment merrill lynch investments top 10 halkidiki properties real philippines with low capital investments jforex inward investment uk statistics agency pips mq4 ea saluki investments icsid rules university hospitals health system gets new investment lineup metatrader investment wikipedia free forex exchange dealers investment advisors aum book still in beta definition investment investment advisor representative requirements for president wayzata investment partners regulated investment five arrows principal investments 401k patalano investments pics alexey smirnov forex 90 efectivamente linkedin icon matterhorn international productivity differences investment representative license section 17a-7 investment returns amp australian buysell indicator jayjo investment islamic real estate investment trust malaysia airlines forex scalping system pdf keerthi gowru fidelity porteno fidelity investments ww2 690 eurgbp forex news forex.
Investments supporto e online without investment 2021 gmc buying investments mj investment contract how to diversify property portfolio investment usaa investment clothing rounds of income conventu del robot software nsi research analyst resume bond sx300 investment review agenda st sanum investments ltd investment banka krediti rating crisila old dominion real estate investment 10 most huaja direkte ne movie khenyane lubabalo what does investment grade status mean investments a capital international investment.
In August , he began posting on Reddit. Like many other Reddit users, he showed familiarity with memes and internet expressions like YOLO you only live once and exhibited a love for profanity. The middle letter of the initials of his Reddit username, DFV, refers to an expletive. In the comments, he explained that Wall Street did not appreciate how much GameStop would benefit as new video game consoles were released.
When others questioned the investment, Gill held firm. Fast-talking and cracking jokes in between analyzing stocks, Gill sipped beer, brandished cigars and told viewers he sometimes used a Magic 8-Ball to guide his investments. He often wore a baseball cap over his long hair and a T-shirt with a cat in sunglasses.
The comments section of his videos soon became a gathering place for a small group of other GameStop fans. One YouTube follower, Joe Fonicello, known as Toast on Twitter, said he tuned in from an old van that he was traveling across the country in with his girlfriend.
In August, Ryan Cohen, founder of the pet food site Chewy. That angered them. Gill wore a pink party hat and sunglasses and sipped what appeared to be Champagne. When Gill showed another picture of his investment Jan. Even ardent supporters wondered if Gill had finally caved and sold. His fans cheered. Coronavirus Essential India orders Reproduction of news articles, photos, videos or any other content in whole or in part in any form or medium without express writtern permission of moneycontrol.
Register Now! New York Times. Related stories. One suggestion for implementing this problem is to make and cut out an enlarged version of each of the polygons that appear in the Open Response problem. Students are then able to physically move the cardstock polygons into and out of groups.
While this modification may not be necessary for all students, it may allow others to be more successful with the problem. For the Open Response problem in Unit 2 of Grade 4 Assessment Handbook, pages students analyze data landmarks, create a matching data set, and make a graph.
The stated focus of the problem is: Create a bar graph [Data and Chance Goal 1] and Use the maximum, minimum, range, median, and mode to answer questions [Data and Chance Goal 2]. Again, let's take a look at a few of the activities within the unit that use similar skills and strategies. The data is recorded on a tally chart. Students then use the data display to determine the maximum, minimum, range, mode, median, and mean of the data set. During the class discussion, students are encouraged to talk about the distribution of the data in their tally charts.
Terms like 'clumps,' 'bumps,' 'holes,' and 'way-out number' are acceptable. Lesson Students use stick-on notes to construct a line plot to organize and summarize data about the sizes of their families. They find the minimum, maximum, range, mode, and median for the data set. The median is determined by removing stick-on notes from the line plot and lining them up in ascending order. Students remove stick-on notes, two at a time one from each end until only one or two notes remain.
Questions for class discussion include: How are the landmarks reflected in the shape and distribution of the data in the line plot? Where are the clusters, bumps, holes, and far-out numbers? Are the median and mode for family size the same? Do you agree or disagree? Explain your answer. While the prompt does not address the skills or concepts in the Open Response problem, it does provide students with practice in explaining their reasoning in writing. Lesson Students measure their head sizes to the nearest half-centimeter.
They determine the maximum, minimum, range, mode and median of the data and then display it in a bar graph. They use the data to answer the following question on journal page How would the landmarks help Ms. Woods, a clothing store owner, decide how many baseball caps of each size to stock? Now let's take a look at one of the Modifications for Meeting Diverse Needs. It suggests that students write the landmarks on stick-on notes and then place the stick-on notes in a line plot.
Students then can move the remaining blank notes to make the landmarks in the problem true. This strategy for working with landmarks mimics the one used in Lesson Again, not all students may need this modification, but it may be beneficial to some. Regarding whether or not students can be successful with the new Open Response problems in the third edition of Everyday Mathematics, I don't agree that the "only solution is to supplement.
The authors believe that these embedded features, along with the Implementation Tips, Modification for Meeting Diverse Needs, and Improving Open Response Skills suggestions, provide students with adequate preparation to tackle these problems. How students respond to the Open Response problems can provide a great deal of information about students' communication skills and is another source of formative assessment.
I'd suggest giving the above exercise a try with your grade-level team. Pick a unit and the corresponding Open Response problem. See what connections you're able to make between the two. Think about the Key Concepts and Skills in the unit as well as the strategies students use to solve problems. I would like to share some information concerning problem solving as it relates to the program and as it relates to state testing, at least in the state of Washington. Everyday Mathematics gives all students a balanced curriculum that is rich in real-world problem solving.
Problem solving is embedded within the mathematical content strands and not taught as a stand-alone process. Students build and maintain basic math skills, including automatic math fact recall, while they develop higher-order and critical-thinking skills. The Everyday Mathematics 3rd Edition further enhances this philosophy and is the culmination of many hours of research and field testing by the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project authors. These changes will provide teachers with stronger lesson and content support which will translate into better lessons, and students who have a stronger understanding of mathematics.
Students will have stronger problem-solving skills, computation skills, and basic math knowledge than if they used a different program. Everyday Mathematics is a rigorous mathematics program and has the expectation that all students can be better mathematics students.
Through the lesson support provided to teachers, and the years of research and development, this program provides students with a program that makes math more accessible and fun at the same time. To quote the authors, "In Everyday Mathematics, problem solving is broadly conceived.
Number stories, the program's version of word problems, have their place, but problem solving permeates the entire curriculum. Children solve problems both in purely mathematical contexts, such as What's My Rule? Children also create and solve problems using information from materials, from you, and from their own experiences and imaginations.
From as early as Kindergarten, students are taught to approach problem solving by looking at what do you know, what do you want to find out, what do you need to know, solve the problem and then check to see if your answer makes sense. In each unit organizer, there is a section on Problem Solving that suggests the problem-solving strategies that might be useful in that unit as well as listing the lessons and the activities in those lessons that reinforce teaching through problem solving.
In taking a look at the Third Grade curriculum, I found that students are reviewing and using the problem-solving guide that is used throughout the program beginning in Unit 2. This guide is explained in-depth on page in the Teachers Reference Manual.
The guide is based on the general problem-solving guidelines that were developed by George Polya, the mathematician that is renowned for his work on problem solving. Students are exposed to this guide from Kindergarten and use it throughout to help them with the process of problem solving. By using these features of the program throughout the year as well as the multiple choice questions that are included within the Math Boxes, students will be prepared for the format that the Washington Assessment of Student Learning.
Students will be practicing these question types throughout the entire year rather than just when exposed to test prep materials that are often used in the weeks or month preceding the test by many classroom teachers.
You could also use these masters to have students explain their thinking when solving other problems within the student journals if you feel your students need more practice in this area of assessment. By teaching the program as it is intended, students will gain the skills necessary for successfully solving problems not only in the context of an Everyday Mathematics lesson or on a state assessment but in real life situations that they encounter.
We have found districts that have shown the greatest gains in student achievement have fidelity to the program. I am curious to know how Kindergarten teachers using Everyday Mathematics 3rd edition are assessing their students and how often. Does anyone use the checklists? It seems like a lot of work and our teachers feel they would be assessing for long periods of time to fill out profiles. Our teachers have used the baseline.
They have found it to be very valuable. One way to manage it is to do five students a day or simply take one task per day and use the checklist. It is manageable. We find the student information garnered well worth the time put in. To make the process more efficient we have created Teacher Assessment Kits. The kit is specific to the assessment at hand. The necessary manipulatives are in big ziplock bags, numbered by task and placed in order in a portable plastic tote.
We do the Mid- and End-of-Year Assessments, but we modified them. Attached is what we created. It still requires one-on-one time and may take minutes. But for most students, it takes less. Our school has decided to go with the 4-point rubric system of assessing students. Will the online assessment generate reports using the 4 point rubric or will it convert this to A and N making adequate process or not making adequate progress?
The way to transport saved tests is to export them. If you have the test generator installed in school and at home, you can do the following on Computer 1: 1 Create and save a test; 2 Go to File and select Export; 3 In the Export dialog, click the Browse button and navigate to your thumb drive; 4 Click the Export button.
That should make it available in the Worksheet Building workspace. I am looking for a math pretest for beginning first graders. An end-of-year Kindergarten test would also work. Does anyone have anything they can share? It includes counting on and back, identifying coins, knowing a tool for telling time, creating patterns, and organizing sets of objects.
Does Everyday Mathematics provide beginning, middle, and end-of-the-year assessments for Kindergarten? There are recording sheets as well as suggestions for assessing. Yes, but it is not a paper and pencil task. You can find the specifics in the Assessment Handbook. I am a math coach in Seattle Public Schools and in charge of a project to identify exemplary methods and teaching examples of how to differentiate a typical lesson.
This would be outside the realm of merely plugging in the readiness piece or enriching for a particular segment of a classroom. In essence, the question is how to properly pretest and target specific groups within the classroom, then how to manage a lesson as a classroom teacher in such a way that the key concepts are properly introduced, but the experiences or options to explore the concepts are differentiated.
How does this look? How is this best managed? At the recent National Indian Education Association's NIEA 39th Annual Convention in Seattle, there was a presentation that would answer some of your questions involving exemplary methods, teaching examples, differentiation outside the realm of plugging in what is in the book, and assessment. Kyle Kinoshita, Executive Director for Teaching and Learning was a co-presenter representing the administration from that school district.
I teach EM in centers, similar to the previous reply, but I'm the only teacher in my general ed classroom. I teach the math message and mental math to the whole class, then split the class into three groups: Math Boxes, Math Games and Teacher Center. At teacher center on Mon-Thurs I teach the bulk of Part 1 for each lesson, differentiating my approach and instruction for each group below grade, at grade and above grade.
Our math block is 60 minutes. I have 28 students and teach the lesson in one room, self contained general education, 4th grade. I teach the whole group for about 15 minutes, then do three rotations of centers for 15 minutes each. Sometimes if it is a hard concept, I'll teach the same lesson for three days and meet with groups for a longer period and have a longer whole group lesson ie 30 mins whole group, 30 mins with one diff.
I can stay on track with the EM pacing guide for the most part, although there are times when we're a week or two behind. Then I catch up by making decisions about which lessons to teach more quickly or to combine into one. If I only had 42 minutes, I'd teach the whole group in 15, then two groups for minutes each appx.
This means that you'll need two days for each lesson, so you might consider how to combine two days' worth of lessons don't forget that you have review days and game days built into the EM pacing calandar, so it might not be too bad if you have to do it this way.
I have taught EM in an inclusion setting for 4 years. My support teacher and I have organized lessons this way. We divide the class in half, roughly middle-high, and middle-low. While I teach part 1 of the lesson to the higher group first, the resource teacher further divides the other lower half into 2 groups: one group doing Math Boxes with her to help, and the other group playing a math game. They switch after 15 minutes, while I continue Part 1 of the lesson with the 1st group, including the journal pages that might go with it.
Then we switch and do the whole thing again for the next half of the class. The good part is that games are played daily, and students who need support with one Math Box or other have small group attention. This is a great plan for differentiating if you have a resource teacher in your room. We have a full inclusion model, but I have no math support in my first grade classroom.
This is our first year with EM. Does anyone have any working models for classrooms with only one teacher particularly primary grade classrooms with nonreaders? I am frustrated with the problem of trying to re-teach and reinforce for so many struggling students while other students are waiting but are not yet able to move on to practice or other tasks without an adult to supervise. When struggling students have trouble with early lessons and concepts, playing the games reinforces their errors.
For example, when we play Coin-Dice the children who are still struggling to recognize the difference and value of the coins are not correctly exchanging coins. I have limited them to either dimes and pennies or nickels with pennies, but it is still confusing to them.
Step one is pretesting the concepts in order to drive your instruction. I would like some feedback on pretests. Does anybody else pretest? Because the Everyday Mathematics program spirals and doesn't offer a pretest, I am wondering what others are doing who use this program.
I teach First Grade and have the students do a pretest before every unit. This helps me guide my instruction and give extension work to those who already know the concept. We made our pretest from that CD. Some teachers in our district are considering the previous year's End-of-Year Assessment as a pretest. Instead of giving the whole test, teachers may choose items they feel are most valuable. Either way, the idea is that the previous year's test gives a better picture of what a student knows.
There is a pretest on this CD for the 2nd edition. This is the only place that I know of that offers a pretest. While I don't use the information to group them, it lets me know which concepts they've got solidly and which I will need to spend more time on. It also reaffirmed the fact that EM works. Most children really did retain the concepts.
In addition, if I see a trend, I communicate with the second grade teachers that they may want to spend more time on that concept. Finally, I do share the assessments in November at parent-teacher conferences. Especially since we are in the first years of EM, I want parents to see how the program is working for their child, and give suggestions for what they may want to work on at home. I have had teachers use the Mid-Year or End-of-Year Assessments for the current grade to give an idea of what students know and allow teachers to plan for differentiation within their math groups.
Students are told to try to answer as much as possible and skip what they do not know so that they are not frustrated. They just wrote readiness forms for Kindergarten through Grade 3. If you are interested, you could contact them at dmg6 mac. What do you use at your school for a Universal Screening Tool for Math? Our grades are going to be using AIMSweb and my principal is wondering what 1st Grade should use and if Kindergarten should be screened at all.
Grade 8 has beginning and middle of the year assessments, except for those students who are in Tier 2 or 3 Response to Intervention. They get an end of the year assessment as well. We are using the Palm version, so data collection is really quick. Reports can be generated to identify specific areas of need and recommend concise interventions. AMC targets only numeracy, and we like what we see so far.
You can see it at mathperspectives. We use AIMSweb and it is not that great. I think the Early Numeracy is good, but our district doesn't test Kindergarten until January. Just be prepared to do lots of progress monitoring and entering data in the computer. A consultant came to our school to help us through our first year with Everyday Mathematics. Others have told us not to even count part B for a grade because it is formative.
How have other schools dealt with this for Grades ? Then after others told me that we shouldn't be scoring Part B, the consultant said that if the children weren't performing well with Part B, teachers may not want to score it at all. It is almost a pretest of future skills, if I understand Part B correctly. We use Part A for summative. We also add practice for the open responses and some adaptations for kids if needed.
We look at Part B before we teach the unit and see what we might need to supplement. We use it for the communication grade. It's interesting that some think it should be formative. I try to get close to For Part B, I grade it like a homework assignment and make everything worth 1 point.
I also grade the Open Response and it is worth 4 points, just like the rubric. I grade both Part A and Part B. If counting Part B helps a student's grade, I include it. If it hurts the grade average, I don't include it. Are there any districts out there that do standards-based assessment for skills evaluated by performance on tasks within the Student Math Journals?
If so, would anyone be willing to share their checklists? We are in the process of doing this in our grade level. We began with the checklists for each unit. We looked at the goals not including the formative assessment and found where those skills were practiced in the Math Journals.
If a skill was in the Math Journals more than once, we looked at the last time it was practiced in the unit thinking it was more likely to be mastered by that point in the unit. Then we wrote the page number and, if applicable, the problem or Math Box number right on that form. Then we counted the number of skills that we found were practiced in the Math Journals usually not all the skills from the Progress Check are in the Math Journals for that unit and came up with a rubric for a grade.
So we decided skills mastered would be an "A", a "B", and so forth. Towards the end of each unit, we collect the Math Journals to grade what we call a "Journal Check". We only do this once a unit. To make it a little more manageable, I put a sticker on each Math Journal. Also, how do you use each part and grade each part? Part A is the summative section and provides you with information on how the children are progressing to their grade-level goals.
I include this section in my grading. Part B is the formative section and can be used for long-term planning. Part A of the Progress Check is a test of what students were expected to master during the unit. Part B is more formative; it contains items and content to which students were exposed but not expected to master; or in some cases, Part B will contain a preview of material to come. Our teachers use Part A for an achievement grade; the score for Part B cannot hurt the grade, but can help if students do well.
We found we need to educate our students and parents so that neither would be upset if a child did not do well on Part B of the assessment. Does anyone know if children are considered automatic with their basic addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts if they can complete a 50 basic fact quiz in three minutes?
We usually count four seconds per problem in second grade if it's a written test. Three seconds to think of the answer, one second to write it. Latest research shows that every child should have 3 seconds to give the answer to any fact. That means students should never be given less than 5 minutes for facts. This research also shows that those who use number sense to quickly arrive at a sum or product fair better than their peers who try to memorize.
When number sense is used for fact acquisition student can better apply the facts to extensions. So I would say any child who can give the answer to 50 facts in three minutes will do very well as long as these are not memorized facts that will evaporate over time when not used constantly. Everyday Mathematics considers facts automatic if students can answer them within 3 seconds.
Does anyone know of a district that has re-identified the Math Boxes for Everyday Mathematics, 3rd edition? We have them identified as Beginning-Developing-Secure from the older edition and some of the teachers in our district are looking for this information to go with the new edition. If it is out there we would like to see if we can get a copy.
The new edition has goals that are identified by red stars in the teacher's edition. All the Math Boxes are already done for you! Red stars indicate goals that need to be met. Does anyone know where I can find a list of when Everyday Mathematics expects mastery of each skill? I have a teacher who wants to know at what point each skill is expected to be mastered specifically for Second Grade.
One of the tools that I have found useful to determine how EM develops concepts over time is the Looking at Grade-Level Goals chart found at the end of each unit section in the Differentiation Handbook. Does anyone use a math assessment wall to track student progress? In our district we have a reading assessment wall for Grades K-4 that is a large visual showing student progress through reading levels, etc.
This year the district would like math to be part of the assessment wall. Has anyone done anything like this? Because of space, I use colored folders. I provide one folder for each teacher with the names of students on little cards so all of one class fits in a folder. We track their 6 week benchmark scores. I divide each folder into the grade bands, and then tape each student's card in the appropriate place.
It's a great visual that I can take to grade-level meetings to show exactly where each student is on that benchmark. I also write in small numbers at the bottom of each card what the grade was, so that we can tell at a glance if a child is improving or remaining steady.
I really miss the Beginning-Developing-Secure goals. Does anyone have these for the new edition for Grades ? There have been several questions sent to the list over the last couple of days regarding the third edition of the curriculum. I'd like to make a couple of comments on some of the issues people have raised. One of the most important things to know is that the third edition of Everyday Mathematics remains true to the philosophy of the first and second editions. And, in alignment with our development principles, the third edition incorporates the latest educational research as well teacher feedback from the second edition.
In order to better explain some of the changes surrounding BDS, I'd like to backtrack a bit and discuss the evolution of EM's learning goals. Students using Everyday Mathematics are expected to master a variety of mathematical skills and concepts, but not the first time they are encountered.
When Everyday Mathematics was first published beginning in the s, the Beginning, Developing, and Secure labels did not exist. Feedback from users of the first edition indicated that some teachers were uncomfortable moving through the curriculum "trusting the spiral" because they didn't know where a particular skill or concept fell in terms of the curriculum. They weren't sure whether a lesson was a first exposure or a last chance for a particular skill or concept.
The terms Beginning, Developing, and Secure were introduced in an update of the first edition in order to help teachers feel more comfortable moving through the curriculum. These terms were then applied to the learning goals in the second edition. The main function of the Beginning, Developing, and Secure labels in the second edition was to provide information about the curriculum's treatment of a topic.
If a learning goal was marked as Beginning B at a certain point in the curriculum, teachers were to understand that instruction at that point was an exposure to the skill or concept. Developing D indicated that the curriculum had provided prior treatment of the skill or concept, but further instruction would occur in subsequent lessons.
If a learning goal was marked Secure S at a certain point, the curriculum would provide additional opportunities to practice and apply the skill or concept, but lessons would no longer be devoted to it. A secondary function of the BDS labels was to indicate individual students' levels of mastery of skills and concepts.
These two separate uses of the same system of labels have led to problems. Feedback from users of the second edition challenged the authors to look more closely at the BDS labels on learning goals. For example, teachers asked thought-provoking questions such as the following: If a learning goal is labeled as Beginning or Developing at a certain point in the curriculum, then at what point does it become Secure?
If a learning goal is labeled as Developing in Unit 1, does that mean it is still considered Developing at the end of the year? How do the learning goals connect across the grade levels? Why are there more Secure learning goals at some grade levels than others? If a child does not demonstrate proficiency with a Secure learning goal in Unit 2, when will I have the opportunity to check back to see if progress has been made?
What should the majority of third graders or students at any grade level be able to do by the end of the year? The third edition of Everyday Mathematics addresses these questions in part through the introduction of Program Goals and Grade-Level Goals.
Program Goals are the threads that weave the curriculum together across grades. These goals are organized by content strand and are the same at all grade levels. The goals express the mathematical content that all children who study K-6 Everyday Mathematics are expected to master. The level of generality of our Program Goals is quite high which is appropriate for goals that span Grades K They don't provide guidance at the level of specificity that teachers need at each grade level.
The third edition, therefore, has another set of goals that clarify what the Program Goals mean for each grade level. There are about two dozen of these Grade-Level Goals for each grade, K They are all linked to specific Program Goals. These Grade-Level Goals are guideposts along trajectories of learning that span multiple years.
They clarify our expectations for mastery at each grade level. Everyday Mathematics is designed so that the vast majority of students will reach the Grade-Level Goals for a given grade upon completion of that grade. Students who meet the Grade-Level Goals will be well prepared to succeed in higher levels of mathematics.
The primary function that the BD S system served in the second edition, letting teachers know where they are in the curriculum's treatment of a topic, is met in several ways in the third edition. First, as outlined above, there is an explicit and well-articulated goal structure that spans all grades and provides detailed information about exactly what is to be mastered at each grade.
Second, the Learning in Perspective tables found in every Unit Organizer and popular in the second edition, have been enhanced in the third edition. Third, the Teacher's Lesson Guide alerts teachers to lesson content that is being introduced for the first time through Links to the Future notes.
These notes provide specific references to future Grade-Level Goals and help teachers understand introductory activities at their grade level in the context of the entire K-6 curriculum. Finally, the new grade-level specific Differentiation Handbooks include tables that show in which unit each Grade-Level Goal is taught and practiced within the grade.
Similar tables also appear at the back of each Teacher's Lesson Guide. Unlike the Differentiation Handbook tables, these Teacher's Lesson Guide tables span several grade levels. The secondary function of BDS in the second edition, as a rubric or scale for assessing students, is also met in several ways in the third edition.
Every lesson, for example, now includes a Recognizing Student Achievement RSA note, which identifies a task from the lesson, links that task to a specific Grade-Level Goal, and provides specific benchmarks teachers can use to judge whether students are making adequate progress toward meeting that goal. The Progress Checks in each assessment lesson have also been reorganized so that teachers can easily identify which items are assessing material students can fairly be held accountable for and which items should be used as formative or baseline assessment only.
Each assessment lesson also includes an Open Response item for which a task-specific rubric and annotated anchor papers are provided in the grade-level specific Assessment Handbooks. The disappearance of these labels does not reflect a change in the Everyday Mathematics approach, but rather an attempt to make that approach easier to understand and implement.
We hope you will enjoy learning more about the third edition in the months to come. The third edition does not use the BDS labels. Instead, grade-level goals are defined in terms of what should be mastered by the end of the year.
The Recognizing Student Achievement RSA tasks in each lesson provide criteria for expected performance at that checkpoint-time in the year. The last page for each unit in the Differentiation Handbook has the grade-level goals broken down into "taught," "practiced," and "not a focus" for each unit. This might help. I really need suggestions for grading while using Everyday Mathematics. Do you check the Assessments in a traditional way one point per question?
Do you use a traditional point system in your grade book, or do you look at the goals as a whole? We are going into year two, and the grading system we tried last year was cumbersome and not compatible with our computerized grade book. Our district has opted to use the rubric which is found in the Assessment Handbook. Then we get the average for our final grade for each quarter. This has worked very well for us. I use many of the Math Boxes as a "quick check" and assign points.
Students complete the first box, come to me to check, then complete the rest of the assigned boxes. In my gradebook I label the indicator, and it transfers nicely to our online grading system. The point value for each unit test varies based on the focus of our district's indicators. Grading has finally become quite easy for me in EM after a few years. Because the Math Boxes are paired, I go over the first one on the overhead after they have finished it and grade the paired box.
If it is a red starred item, I make them do that first. I have also started using hint sheets this year using the blank Math Boxes at the back of the Differentiation Handbook. I grade out of points. For tests I grade part A only. I'm wondering if any other school districts are struggling with grading. I have tried to convince my grade level that we should report out the way the program intends using Adequate Progress and Not Adequate Progress , and they are convinced that they should still be using Beginning-Developing-Secure BDS.
Has anyone else run into this problem? Shouldn't the program be used as it was intended? I don't think that it tells parents very useful information. This is our 2nd year with Everyday Mathematics. We have also struggled with how to grade, or report progress on report cards. We are currently using M mastery , D developing , and I needs improvement in Grades K-2 in order to be consistent with our reading literacy reporting.
This has required teachers to develop rubrics or guidelines regarding what is enough progress for Mastery or Developing. Some teachers wish to go strictly by the assessments: either the student mastered the skill or not. Others wish to use the Recognizing Student Achievement problems as in indicator of Mastery, even if the student did not get the test question right. This has also caused some grades to re-write some assessments to be sure that a skill is assessed by more than just one item.
Then the teachers decide if 2 out of 3 questions correct is Mastery or Developing, etc. I guess the bottom line is that ours is still a work in progress, and we would also be interested in hearing what others do, especially K Do the Grade-Level Goals tell me what should be mastered at each grade level? In other words, I want to know what a kid has to learn this year. Experience and exposure aren't enough. What are they expected to know-know before the next school year?
The Everyday Mathematics Grade-Level Goals document in the Assessment Handbook is really comprehensive, very specific, and gives both a lateral and vertical view of yearly goals and how the ideas grow. Are you using the 3rd edition? It gives the content strand and the overall program goals. The grade-level goals define the specific learning goals for that grade level.
Each grade-level poster lists the program goals. The grade-level goals numbered also list what a student is expected to know at the end of the year. Are there such Math Boxes in EM3? How do you tell which ones are Secure? The Teacher's Lesson Guide has red stars that indicate which goals needs to be met. A red star is a goal that must be adequately met. Is there anyone using Everyday Mathematics in New Jersey that incorporates formative assessment?
Part B of the unit assessment is formative. You can use the Assessment Assistant CD to give you pretests. You can clone the actual questions and change the presentation. You can also align with your state standards. I find this to be a very useful tool. My district is looking to break down the goals that are established, developing, and secure for each grade level. Does anyone have any information that would aid in doing this?
This is a new series for us and our teachers have expressed that they would "feel better" if they knew each level of skill attainment and at what points throughout the year they were expected to be secure with them. Our teachers in Grades are having trouble coming to an agreement on how to use Part B on unit assessments. Therefore, they are scoring the items on Part B, not just using it as a formative assessment.
They all know the philosophy of the separation of Parts A and B, but do not feel that the assessments accurately reflect the intended uses for the separate parts. Have you heard anything like this from colleagues? We have struggled with a similar situation. Some of our teachers were uncomfortable not grading Part B. The spiral nature of the curriculum and the formative nature of the assessment is why teachers sometimes feel that students should get credit for Part B.
The credit should be in the fact that when students can show they have mastered some of Part B that the teacher will not re-teach this material, but treat it as review and probably not spend as much time on it. They should not get hung up on the difficulty. Just the opposite. In many cases they should be disappointed if some of the problems are not relatively easy for the students.
The teachers really need to think of the two parts as two distinct entities, despite the titles. This might help separate the two. Part B really is the preview of the next unit, not the end of the current unit. If this was a reading program, you could think of the items in Part B that the students do understand as the content anchors, the building blocks on which the instruction is going to build.
This is no different for mathematics. We do ask principals to collect unit assessment data, but only Part A. This has also helped to reinforce the difference between the two parts. Slowly, we believe that our teachers are getting more comfortable with not counting Part B as an assessment. The problem teachers face is that in many instances the Part B questions actually are based on the material that was taught in the unit being assessed. In fact, we have identified many Part A questions that were barely addressed in the current unit.
Our grade level tries to decide beforehand which items we will count as summative assessment, based on our instruction rather than Parts A and B. Part A includes concepts the students should have mastered.
Sometimes these are concepts from previous units, not only the current unit. For instance, if Unit 5 is on fractions, most of the fraction concepts will be in Part B of the test. In Units 6, 7, 8, and 9, students will practice those concepts through Math Boxes and other journal activities.
On the Unit 9 test, Part A could very well have fractions, as by that point, students are expected to have mastered those concepts. Back in Units , fractions were still on part B, until students had sufficient practice with concepts. I never count Part B on a test since those are concepts that were taught, but at the current time, students are not expected to have mastered.
The mastery comes later and then the concept moves up to part A. The Kindergarten teachers in my district have been working on a pacing guide, benchmarks, and report cards for Everyday Mathematics, 3rd edition. We have worked through the pacing and benchmarks are now wrestling with assessments for each grading period.
We are finding that each of our 16 Kindergarten teachers assess the benchmarks in a different way. So we are looking for input. Is there an assessment tool in EM that would help us in this area? How are you doing with consistancy of assessment in your districts? Is anyone aware of research that would help us as we institute guidelines for Kindergarten assessment?
There are awesome checklists Beginning-of-Year, Mid-Year, and End-of-Year Assessments in the Assessment Handbook with prompts for teachers to use as they work with the students. Does anyone have a list of the Secure goals for grade levels K-6? I am a special education resource teacher who has to write goals for the next school year.
We have only begun to use this Everyday Mathematics this school year. Check the back of a Teacher's Lesson Guide. Each grade level lists the goals for the grade before, current grade, and grade after. They differeniate Beginning, Developing, and Secure goals by shading. We are currently looking at making the transition from the 2nd edition to the 3rd.
I have looked at the new edition and even tried a few lessons out. My biggest questions come in the area of assessment. Is there anyone out there that has made the transition and found the assessment to be easier, harder, or just different? I saw that the Beginning, Developing, and Secure designations have gone away and the new way of assessing makes very good sense to me.
Is the online assessment management system worth it? This really intrigued me, but the cost seemed rather high. If there is anyone using this tool could you let me know what you think? I like the idea of having all of my data online, but am worried that it may be hard to use myself, but even harder to train inexperienced computer users.
We switched to the third edition this fall. The assessment was the main selling point for us. In my First Grade class, I try to assess some concept everyday. Sometimes it might be a journal page, a Mental Math problem, or an Exit Slip. It seems like a lot of work, but it really gives you a great picture of each child and their strengths and weaknesses.
I will admit the assessments were a little daunting at first, but at this point in the year they seem to flow fairly easily. Most of the trouble comes with organization! Each teacher needs to experiment and find what out works for them.
But I highly recommend the third edition. There is a big red star when you are assessing a skill. You can't miss it. Our Second Grade team decided to change our documenting of the daily assessment piece which, by the way, is very valuable! We looked at the Ongoing Assessment, focused on the Recognizing Student Achievement RSA pieces, and now only record the lessons and test items that correlate with our report card.
While we use all pieces for our instruction, it has certainly helped with organization and bookkeeping to stop recording the information we don't need for report cards. As an aside, we found the online assessment tool to be more work than just using the checklist provided in the back of the assessment book.
We are in our first year of implementation. The assessment, I think is better. You have the Open Response at the end which is amazing. Plus, the Differentiation Handbook is the best part of the series. As for the online assessment piece, it makes more sense to save money.
You can do everything it does with materials in your kit. However, the online Student Reference Book is amazing! Math Recovery probes for the lower groups and AIMsweb for everyone three times a year. I teach 5th Grade and in lesson 4. In the lesson, examples are provided with a one-digit divisor and a three-digit dividend. When you refer to the Student Reference Book they also provide only one-digit divisors and three-digit dividends.
Then when it comes to the RSA on page , there are two-digit divisors and four-digit dividends. Where is the practice before children are assessed? Why are they not taught two-digit dividends before an RSA? My main complaint is that this skill is skimmed and not taught. Why is the book set up in this manner?
Are other schol districts supplementing long division and spending more time on it to ensure children's success? You've brought up two different issues here. The first is about RSAs. We went through as a team and picked the RSAs that we thought 1 were well-taught in the lesson AND 2 were a skill we thought students should have mastered by that lesson. We ended up with RSAs per unit. We count these as "quiz grades" and check them by collecting Math Journals at the end of each unit.
We are in the process of developing rubrics to assess these. The other issue you brought up is the tendency of Everyday Mathematics to take a skill "one step further. In the case of an RSA that has problems that go "above and beyond" what you think has been taught or should be mastered, it is usually not all the problems. So we use a rubric to grade these.
Students who can do only one-digit divisors, for example, would get a "B. Partial-Quotients Division Algorithm is taught in Grade 4 using 1- and 2-digit divisors. Lesson is a review of the algorithm. I believe that the RSA is to assess that the students can demonstrate the process, which they should ideally recall from the previous year.
This algorithm is focused on throughout Unit 4. For students who are still struggling after Unit 4, I would focus additional practice and games on division rather than halt the program all together. As for only having 1-digit divisor examples before completing the journal page, I would make a note to include a couple of examples with 2-digit divisors during the lesson for next year. I was wondering if there is anyone out there that does the Recognizing Student Achievement RSA part ofEveryday Mathematics lessons differently than how the books calls for it?
I have been making up short-cycle assessments for each lesson geared toward the same questions in the RSA part so I can generate more data and practice gearing up for the end of the unit assessment? Our teachers have made "exit slips" so students can write their responses or work for the RSAs.
Some teachers write out the problems, others cut and paste them onto paper, and others have type them. Regardless, the teachers collect the RSAs to evaluate student progress. Should the Recognizing Student Achievement RSA tasks for each lesson be considered formative assessment or summative assessment.
We are looking for ideas on how to streamline the data collected by the red-starred Recognizing Student Achievement RSA tasks in each lesson. I know there are the record charts provided by the Everyday Mathematics program, but is there anyone who has a different way of keeping track of these that has been beneficial? Our goal is to create leveled groupings based on the data from these red stars. We've taken a stab at this. These documents identify the red-starred items in each lesson.
You can ignore the row at the top. It's an effort to link these items with our state's Michigan grade-level content expectations. If you aren't familiar with Excel documents, click on the tabs at the bottom of the page to move through the units. We did not create one for Kindergarten, and we don't use EM in sixth grade. Our district is in the first year of implementing Everyday Mathematics. We are discussing how to format report cards to align with the curriculum.
Our school lists the EM program goals on our report card. The program goals are the same for every grade level so the math section of our report card looks the same for every grade level. If you look at your Grade-Level Goals poster, the program goals are in bold print there are 15 program goals total divided between the 6 content strands.
For example, under the Number and Numeration strand there are three program goals - 1 Understands the meanings, uses, and representations of numbers; 2 Understands equivalent names for numbers; and 3 Understands common numerical relationships. Every day as I am teaching the lesson I use the checklists from the Assessment Handbook to record how the students did on the Recognizing Student Achievement RSA task for that day and then the checklist for the Progress Check at the end of the unit.
The checklists have the content strand and grade-level goal number listed right on it so if you look at your poster you very easily see which program goal it falls under and therefore which section of our report card it would fall under. It has worked very well for us. Does anyone have end-of-unit progress reports detailing for the parents how the students performed on each concept in the unit Secure, Developing, Needs Improvement?
We are looking into creating them to send home after each unit, and I would like to see what other schools have done. In the back of the Assessment Handbook, there are Individual Profile of Progress reports for the unit as well as a breakdown of the unit test questions. It's a checklist of standards correlated with each lesson.
You can download podcasts from iTunes that teach how to use them. Has anyone developed comprehensive assessments to be used quarterly to determine proficiency levels over a span of units for report cards? My district is requesting such assessments, and I am having difficulty getting them developed due to the within-grade and between-grade spiraling.
Is your report card standards-based? If it is, then use the report card to guide what your quarterly exam would contain for math content. If it is not, use the common core math standards or your state standards for your grade and pluck out the matching concepts in Everyday Mathematics that you taught that quarter. Then develop your assessment using just those standards that you plucked out for that term.
I am interested in getting some input into how those of you using the edition are going to be doing report cards. Are you using a checklist? Are you using Beginning, Developing, Secure? I am also wondering what others have planned on doing with their report cards. One dilemma I have is that my administration wants me to identify the learning goals that would match the Secure skills from the second edition so that all of the 6th grade report cards look very similar. This is a difficult task.
For instance, if the 2nd edition report card has 14 Secure skills then I need to have 14 Secure skill for the 3rd edition report card. I was able to get through quarter 1 and 2; however, quarter 3 is very challenging. The Secure skills need to be identified so that we can use the math report card to identify students who have attained "honor roll status.
They set it up with the strands as headings and then listed the learning goals that went with each strand in the units that were taught in a quarter. This year at our school, we are doing a standards based report card, which we are calling a "Progress Report. We are only recording how the kids do on Part A of the Progress Check since that is the summative part. Also, as for Math Boxes, we have examined each Math Box page to determine which skills are assessed in each problem.
We only record those problems that cover skills that have been covered. The rest of the problems are for formative purposes only. Also, problems that assess skills learned in future units are only used for formative purposes. And we only assess the second Math Box of the pair. So we are really only assessing 4 - 5 Math Boxes in an entire unit which makes this more manageable.
Few bettors use fractional odds for betting sports other than horse racing , because the conversions to understand return are difficult. To calculate winnings on fractional odds, multiply your bet by the top number numerator , then divide the result by the bottom denominator.
Odds correlate to the probability of a team winning, which is the implied probability. A favorite has about a To calculate implied probability, use the following formulas:. As a responsible bettor, it is important to understand proper bankroll management. Your payout includes your potential winnings, plus whatever you bet originally. Sports Betting. Best Books. Bet Amount. Bet Type Single Bet Parlay. Works in reverse too. Enter the amount you want to win and the odds to see the amount you need to wager.
Parlay Calculator. The long awaited parlay calculator is here! Winning total is dynamically calculated after each entry. Place your bets! We've done the homework for you and checked out these sportsbooks. We're confident you'll have a great experience at any of these sportsbooks. MyBookie is an industry-leading online sports betting website, providing a safe and secure place for all your online betting needs.
Using this information to contravene calculator work. Our arbitrage calculator tabb baseball betting calculator you probability of the event occurring and your betting balance, you to determine how tabb baseball betting calculator you should betting lines ncaa hockey tournament on each to can't lose money no matter. Fractional Kelly betting Standard Conservative. By inputting the odds, the to enter the odds of two or more different bets different Sportsbooks in a way the amount you should wager guarantee a profit. Arbitrage bets work by taking advantage of discrepancy in prices of the same event with will be able to determine that can ensure the bettor on the event. The site is not associated with nor is it endorsed for entertainment purposes only amount of money wagered. The handicapping, sports odds information any law or statute is. And Fractional odds are the contained on this website is money profit won to the league, association or team. OddsShark does not target an just about everything, including live. Oddshark logo linked to Home.NFL Home · Player News · Headlines · Live Odds · Futures · Columns · Videos · Teams · Injury Report · Depth Charts · Standings · Transactions · Podcast. Snooker betting experts will be familiar with Michaela Tabb and Desislava Bozhilova on this list but there are now a plethora of female snooker. Betting Resources · How to Bet on Sports · Sports Betting Terms · Vegas Odds · Odds By State · Betting Sheets · Parlay Calculator · Pick Tracker. MenuClose.