Reviewed OER Library



<< Return to resource list

CK-12 Geometry Honors Concepts

CK-12 Foundation/Kaitlyn Spong

View Resource

Note that this resource was reviewed during the Spring 2014 review period. The resource may or may not have been updated since the review. Check with the content creator to see if there is a more recent version available.

Review

This resource was reviewed by OSPI in Spring 2014. Learn more about the review process and the data analysis approach.

Background from OER Project Review Team
CK-12 Foundation is a non-profit organization that creates and aggregates curated STEM content. Editing tools are built into the online system to facilitate personalization of content. Multiple formats allow for creation of device agnostic materials. The CK-12 platform offers many supplemental video, audio, and interactive, learning objects and real-world applications that can be accessed to adapt and remix the Flexbook. This should factor into the viewer’s analysis of the review results.

IMET (Learn more)

Chart with scale from 0 (Strongly Disagree) to 3 (Strongly Agree). Consistent Content: 2, Rigor & Balance: 2, Practice Connections: 1, Standards for Math Content: 2, Quality Indicators: 2.

EQuIP (Learn more)

Revision needed (7.8)
Chart with scale of 'meets criteria' from 0 (None) to 3 (All). Alignment: 2.0, Key Area of Focus: 3.0, Instructional Supports: 1.8, Assessment: 1.0.
Chapter 2: Rigid Transformations

Achieve OER (Learn more)

Chart with scale from 0 (Weak) to 3 (Superior). Explanation: 2.8, Interactivity: 1.8, Exercises: 1.6, Deeper Learning: 1.8.
Chapter 2: Rigid Transformations

See standard error chart for the review scoring

Reviewer Comments (Learn more)

Moderate (2.2)

Comments/Ideal Use:

This would be a useful resource for teachers skilled in incorporating material in a collaborative learning environment in which students explore the concepts. It could be used for instruction that follows exploration and as a preliminary activity to tackling real world problems that would be solved using the concepts learned.

Challenges:

  • Lack of connection and focus on Mathematical Practices. Exercises are skill-based without enough attention to higher-order thinking processes
  • There do not appear to be resources that can be used by teachers to implement the curriculum
  • External interactive resource provides feedback to students but there is no apparent feedback or resource for self-evaluation within the curriculum

Suggestions:

  • Incorporate additional exercises that are more problem-based and real world focused
  • Provide more specific targets and learning outcomes that are being addressed so that teachers (and students) focus on intended learning
  • Incorporate interactive resources with immediate feedback directly in the curriculum to make a stronger connection to mastery of concepts taught in the lesson

Comments/Ideal Use:

This resource could be used in a classroom, a computer lab environment. A teacher with limited experience would do just fine with this object. I found this resource dynamic and has wonderful potential for differentiation within the classroom. When comparing with CK12 Geometry concepts, there were some features not included within this resource but clearly could be created and used as a full course. The Flexbook is wonderful.

Challenges:

  • No link to Geogebra, only referenced
  • No interactive practice, as in CK-12 Geometry Concepts
  • No answer keys

Suggestions:

  • Add a links to Geogebra
  • Create answer keys and interactive practice

Comments/Ideal Use:

This resource could be used (and seems to be designed for) students who are studying geometry independently without the guidance of a teacher. Lessons could be used to give to students as a textbook replacement when they have been absent for extended periods of time. With the suggested revisions, a teacher could use this as his or her classroom textbook, but only with the development of comprehensive teacher support materials.

Challenges:

  • No mention of the Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • No instructional support materials or meaningful assessments are provided
  • The link between rigid motion and congruence/similarity shortcuts is made too early
  • Modeling connections are weak and fragmented

Suggestions:

  • Add resources to each lesson that (a) identify the appropriate SMPs being used in the lesson, (b) provide suggestions for students to develop this practice during the lesson, and (c) add items to the practice problems that require students to use the indicated SMP
  • Include teaching notes for each lesson that include which CCSS content standard is being targeted, has a clear learning outcome, includes discussion of the use and development of the Standards for Mathematical practice, gives suggestions for instructional implementation (including common misconceptions and extensive support for struggling learners and English Language Learners), gives guidance on formative and summative assessment, and gives the instructor guidance as to the mathematics being studied and it's connections within the course and to other courses
  • Include solution guides for the practice exercises in each lesson. Include opportunities during the lesson for students to engage in meaningful formative assessment in which they get feedback on their work. Provide rigorous summative assessments with solutions and scoring rubrics that address each of the standards being taught to their full depth.
  • Provide students with opportunities to use the definition of rigid motion to establish triangle congruence, then develop the shortcuts. Continue to connect congruence (and similarity) to transformations throughout the materials rather than abandoning it as soon as the shortcuts are established.
  • Modeling should be ongoing throughout the curriculum and included in as many lessons as possible. Provide students with the opportunity to develop their own models for complex situations rather than prescribing the models for them.

Comments/Ideal Use:

Could be used as a stand-alone course if suggested adaptations are made. Out of class or in class instruction (if capable) for support or different learning style of student. Follow of the resource is great. Examples and labeled diagrams are clear and thought out.

Challenges:

  • Assessments in the Flexbook are a bit confusing. Had to visit the concepts page for rigid transformation and was unclear if the object reviewing was for the "honors" Flexbook.
  • Practice problems only had items, no scoring guide could be found by this reviewer.

Suggestions:

  • Add to the Flexbook the assessment piece, scoring guide/rubrics with the "practice" problems

Comments/Ideal Use:

The ideal use of this resource is as a supplemental resource to current curricula. Some of the content presentations are much better than other materials on the market. It would be best if the teacher using any of this material were experienced, and had knowledge of the CCSS content and practice standards, as they are now missing from the lessons. This is a great "first attempt" at writing a text that is truly common core. Kudos to CK12 for the hard effort. It is much needed.

Challenges:

  • No answer keys for problem sets
  • No unit (chapter) assessments (and very limited mid-unit assessments)
  • No number/symbol references to Common Core content standards in lessons
  • No reference at all to the CCSS Math Practices

Suggestions:

  • Provide answer keys for problem sets.
  • Develop quizzes and exams for each unit. (With answer keys, of course)
  • Write the standards addressed by each lesson at the top of each lesson
  • Make specific references to the CCSS Math Practices, particularly in a teacher edition

Creative Commons License
This work by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.