At the close of another academic year, we want to extend a note of appreciation to the hard work and engagement of each member of the working groups. Back in January, during the Community Meeting, we had the privilege of hearing updates from various Working Groups, each diligently working on projects related to curriculum development and research. These groups play a pivotal role in our collective mission to use the undergraduate geometry course as a lever for making a positive impact for increasing the capacity for teaching high school geometry. Here are the highlights from their updates:

Updates on Transformations Group

Julia St. Goar from Merrimack College and Steve Boyce from Portland State University have stewarded the Transformations Working Group this semester. In the fall, the group focused on sharing innovative methods for teaching transformations in their different curricular activities. Several members presented a special approach being used in their classes. The collective aim was to create a universal lesson plan centered around transformation geometry that could be implemented in each of their classes, despite the diverse teaching methods. Moving forward into the spring, the group is considering which student learning outcomes (SLOs) to integrate into this new plan, with an interest in including elements of proof and definitions. Technology use in education was also a topic of lively debate. As they advance, the group plans to refine their objectives in order to effectively develop this lesson plan. There is interest in conducting a lesson study in parallel, similar to what was done with Steve’s Adinkra lesson plan and working group.

Updates on Adinkra Group

Steve Boyce from Portland State University has stewarded the Adinkra Working Group this semester. In the fall, two main initiatives were taken by the group. First, they began developing an observation protocol for the lesson study on the Adinkra Lesson, incorporating a framework featuring the 5 R’s and principles of culturally responsive teaching. The observation protocol is still a work in progress. Secondly, another round of the Adinkra lesson study was conducted, with a member teaching the lesson over two shorter class periods—one at the beginning and another at the end of the semester—to explore a variation of the lesson delivery. In the current semester, the group is analyzing observations from the recent teaching of the Adinkra lesson and plans to teach the lesson again in at least one more classroom. 

Updates on the Teaching GeT Working Group

Nat Miller from the University of Northern Colorado has stewarded the Teaching GeT Working Group. The group’s activity during the last semester was not as intense as before because many members were preoccupied with writing, reviewing, and revising chapters for a book. However, they still managed to convene, and their primary focus has been on reviewing the ESLO group’s responses to certain SLOs (Student Learning Outcomes). They have been  discussing these responses and how they might shape revisions to the SLOs. 

Updates on the ESLO Working Group

Mara Markinson from Queen’s College shared about how the ESLO Working Group is going. The ESLO group is in its second year and includes high school teachers and college instructors, meeting every other Thursday at 4 PM. Each week a participant brings a task that could be used with GeT students to review knowledge needed to teach high school geometry and which can also be generative of more advanced ideas. The figure on the right shows one task presented by Michele Macke in early May. The discussion centers on anticipating what students may do and discussing how the task helps cover content needed for high school instruction.