Module 2: Curriculum and equitable practices

Welcome to Module 2! In this module, I delve into two featured pieces of work that highlight my understanding and application of curriculum design and equitable teaching practices in senior mathematics. Explore how I connect curriculum intent with classroom reality, ensuring inclusivity and promoting deeper learning experiences.

Senior mathematics curriculum 

What it is. A concise PowerPoint that maps the Senior Mathematics curriculum (Gr. 11–12, 2007) to classroom practice. It highlights the Introduction, The Program in Mathematics, the seven Mathematical Processes, Assessment and Evaluation, and key “Program Planning” considerations (special education, ELLs, antidiscrimination education, ICT, safety).

Why it matters. This deck shows how I turn policy into plans: clustering expectations around big ideas, aligning success criteria with the processes, and planning assessment “for/as/of” learning. It’s a bridge from the curriculum document to day-to-day lessons.

Evidence of learning. I connect expectations to concrete strategies (three-part lesson, talk moves, descriptive feedback, and tool selection), and I reference rights-based and safety frameworks so programming is inclusive and compliant.

Link.

Inclusive and equitable math teaching 

What it is. A visual guide for teachers outlining inclusive practices in Senior Math, with prompts to include Black, Indigenous and racialized students’ perspectives, and ideas for partnerships with community members.

Why it matters. It operationalizes equity: co-constructing norms, using multiple representations, auditing contexts and datasets for bias, inviting community expertise, and aligning with AODA/OHRC expectations.

Evidence of learning. I translate policy into routines (example: privacy-by-default tech use, choice of tools, universal design scaffolds, culturally connected tasks) and show how these support well-being and achievement.

Link 

Key takeaways from module 2

This module tightened the connection between curriculum intent and classroom reality. Revisiting the 2007 Senior Mathematics document through the lens of the seven Mathematical Processes helped me re-center problem solving and communication as engines for learning, not add-ons. The program planning sections pushed me to plan with inclusion at the start: anticipating needs of students with IEPs, multilingual learners, and those who benefit from alternative entry points into abstract ideas.

Equity resources reframed my unit and task design. Instead of treating “context” as window dressing, I am now interrogating whose stories and data are represented and why. The anti-oppressive stance pairs naturally with “big ideas”: when ideas are few and powerful, there is more room for multiple voices, representations, and solution paths. The three-part lesson/three-act math structure gave me a practical arc activate, investigate, consolidate that supports curiosity, sense-making, and explicit naming of the Mathematical Processes in student-friendly language. Finally, the digital literacy focus clarified how to use technology purposefully (to model, visualize, and check reasoning) while keeping students safe (privacy, consent, minimal data, accessible alternatives).

Overall, the module moved me from compliance (“I know the document”) to coherence (“My plans, tools, and assessments all serve clear mathematical and human goals”)

New approaches and skills

Designing around big ideas. I learned to cluster expectations under a few enduring ideas so lessons build depth rather than coverage. This helps with spiraling, consolidation, and clearer success criteria.

Making math talk intentional. I adopted specific talk moves and planning notes (who shares first, how to surface multiple representations, how to productively address partial or incorrect reasoning) so conversations generate evidence of understanding without shaming mistakes.

Assessment that grows learning. I refined check-ins (exit tickets anchored to the Mathematical Processes), descriptive feedback aligned to success criteria, and opportunities to revise work shifting evaluation toward thinking, not speed.

Equity in action. I now plan contexts with students, audit datasets for bias, invite community partners, and include multiple ways to show understanding (oral, visual, symbolic, digital, paper). I’m more deliberate about accessibility: alt text, captions, readable fonts, and device-light options.

Purposeful, safe technology. I use tools to extend reasoning (dynamic graphers, simulations, data visualizations) with privacy-by-default settings, consent for recording, and non-tech pathways when needed.

Engaging aspect of module 2

The most interesting part was designing intentional math conversations because I saw how specific prompts surface thinking and misconceptions safely. I now plan who shares first, how to compare representations, and how to address partial reasoning without shame.