Lesson Plan Video Analysis

Student Names: Ellie Stillman and Abby King

Grade Level of Lesson: 8​th​ grade Mathematics
Content focus of Lesson: Cube Roots
Goal: What do you want Our goal for this lesson is for students to understand cubing
your students to learn. a number and taking the cube root of a number, and how
What are your goals for this these two components are related. When we are done
lesson? What do you want teaching, we hope students will have a basic understanding
your kids to be able to do of cube roots, what this computation is, and how it relates to
afterwards?? Why are you a 3-dimensional object. This lesson is taking place because
doing this lesson?? students will have just learned the square root, as well as
distance between points. So, this lesson takes these two
previous lessons to the next level, and is placed sequentially
in the “Connected Math: Looking for Pythagoras” book.

Materials: · Chromebooks
List absolutely EVERYTHING · White board markers (one for each student)
you need to do this · Cups (6)
lesson—especially since · Paper towel
you are going to be sharing · Desks
it. From paper/pencils, · Pencils
chart paper or whatever. · Rulers
· Their math books (Connected Math: Looking for
Pythagoras), specifically section 2.4
· Snap cubes
· 2.4 worksheet and/or notebook paper
· Projector and board
· Document camera
Instructional Strategy
This is your step by step
guide to what you are going
to and in what order. Put
ideas about time involved
to do it step.
Be specific so others can
follow this plan.
Note: Put estimated times
for each part of your
lesson—it will help you to
plan.
1. Students will come in and begin with the bell ringer
question on GoSoapBox.com (7 minutes)
· What is the difference between a square and a cube?
2. We will go over the bell ringer (3 minutes)
3. We will use Geogebra to show the difference between a
square and a cube.
4. Present the essential question: What does it mean to
take the cube root of a number?” (1 minute)
5. Pass out expo markers and let students draw on their
desks to get their excitement out (2 minutes)
6. Present the textbook’s suggested questions, and have
students work them out with the expo markers on their
desks (10 minutes)
7. Students put markers away (1 minute)
8. Introduce cubing up on the board using square roots as
a reference (10 minutes)
9. Pass out snap cubes and have students work through
problems A and B through self-exploration and us walking
around the room (20 minutes)
10. As a class, work through problems C and D, allowing
students to use expo markers or snap cubes ​when
appropriate​ (remainder of bell)
11. ​Last five minutes: ​collect cubes and markers, hand out
exit ticket
Differentiation:
Put any ideas about how
you address any students
who have a special need.
(visual, cognitive or other)
Assessments:
How will you know if your
students learned what you
wanted them to learn?
How can you prove it???
· Students will have access to the problems up on the
board and in their books. So, students who have visual
difficulties can access the problems in multiple ways.
· Students will have access to dot paper for mapping out
the problems if this is more helpful for them.
· Each problem will be read out loud to appeal to auditory
learners.
· The introductory video will have subtitles for students
who are hard of hearing.
· Having hands-on activities (white board desks and
cubes) appeals to kinesthetic learners.
· If a student physically cannot build the cubes, they can
use technological resources to create them.
· The bell ringer will be posed through Google Classroom.
If a student does not want to use this format or cannot use
it, they can do it on paper.
Starting off with the bell ringer, we will have an idea of how
well they grasped the previous content (square roots and
side lengths). We will go over the bell ringer to gage learning
and help any misconceptions. Then, throughout the lesson,
we will be walking around to see how students are doing. If
we see enough students are struggling, we will bring the
problem to the front of the classroom and work through it
together. Finally, at the end of the class, we will pass out an
exit ticket with one math question, and a ranking system in
which students rank how comfortable they feel with the
topic on a scale of 1-5. We will collect the exit ticket as they
leave and read them ourselves to see how we did as
teachers and they did as learners.
 For our lesson, we are introducing the topic of cube roots. Students have been working

with squaring and square roots the past few days, so in our lesson we are taking squares to the

next level. Our hope is the students become comfortable with the notation, understand the

root of the problems, and realize that cubing and cube roots are the inverse operations of each

other. We implemented this lesson based on the Ohio 8th grade math standards, specifically:

8.EE.2​ Use square root and cube root symbols to represent solutions to equations of the form

x2 = ​p ​and x3 ​= ​p​, where ​p ​is a positive rational number. Evaluate square roots of small perfect

squares and cube roots of small perfect cubes. Know that √2 is irrational.

8.EE.3​ Use numbers expressed in the form of a single digit times an integer power of 10 to

estimate very large or very small quantities and to express how many times as much one is than

the other. ​For example, estimate the population of the United States as 3 × 108 ; and the

population of the world as 7 × 109 ; and determine that the world population is more than 20

times larger.

To teach this lesson, we thought about the students in our class and what would best

suit them for a lesson. We purposefully used a lot of questioning, technology, hands-on

learning, and interaction to teach our lesson plan. These students constantly need to be

engaged. While anyone at this age has a short attention span, these kids are super

distractible.To keep the students on task, we used technology for the bell ringer as well as the

explanation of the main differences between squares and cubes. We used the website

GoSoapBox.com​ for the bell ringer, where students entered the class code and answered our
opening question: what is the difference between a square and a cube? The students’ answers

were then visible to the whole class, so we could discuss their thoughts. We then showed the

difference using GeoGebra. We create a square on the x/y coordinate plane and then a cube on

the x/y/z coordinate plane. Students were able to see the difference between 2D and 3D

shapes with this interactive technological tool. This got a very positive reaction from students,

and they thought it was really “cool” to see the two shapes this way.

Our hope overall is this lesson is a connection to other mathematical content, as well as

other outside factors. As previously mentioned, students have worked with squaring and

square roots, so this is taking those skills one step further. This will then connect to future math

when students are asked to find the volume of shapes other than cubes, inverse operations,

and word problems. When students move onto word problems, this will be their connection to

the outside world. Students will be able to see how volume is used in everyday life, and they

will get practice with cubing and cube roots in non-equation questions.

Throughout our lesson​, we made sure to constantly check in with the students. After

we introduced the notation for cubing, we asked students to give us a thumbs up or thumbs

down based on how they felt (4:14). We wanted to grasp how many follow up questions we

needed for students to further understand the topic of cubing. We ended up with a wide range,

so we decided a few extra questions than planned would be best.

Having developed relationships with students, we figured the students are comfortable

enough to share their answers aloud. So, we had students give us the answer with their fingers

(5:35). When we asked students what the cube root of 8 was, we noticed a lot of students had

the right answer. This was most likely because they could see each other’s answers, as when we
asked students if what we were doing make sense, many students said “No” (8:25). This verbal

response told us that we would need to do even more review after lunch. It was also more

truthful, as they just yelled how they felt, instead of showing an answer on their fingers based

on what their peers were doing. The use of formative assessment proved to be really useful for

us, as we catered the rest of our lesson accordingly.

When planning out lesson, we decided it would be most effective for the students to

first discuss at their tables what they thought 33 would be, before we gave them the answer

(1:40-2:10). This was after we reviewed squaring, so we thought this would be a fair leeway into

cubing. We found this to be true when students shared what they discussed (2:10-2:30). We

then moved through cubing as a class, constantly asking the class questions to get their input.
3
Students received lots of open ended questions, like what is √8? This allowed them to work

through the problems on their own, and then receiving support for a facilitated group

discussion. One student shared his answer, and we realized he found the correct answer by

using the cube root, all without realizing it (6:07). We then gave notation to his work, so the

whole class would be able to reach the solution as well (6:47).

This type of discussion, in which we pose the question, students work individually or as a

group, and then share allowed was the structure of our lesson. It proved to be very helpful, as

students could make self discoveries or learn the method from us. We wanted to see how much

students could do on their own, and when students were not able to grasp the content, we

helped with a group discussion. A lot of the time, students would help lead the conversation

too, chiming in when prompted. Before they all left for lunch, we made sure to summarize what

had been covered in the previous half hour (8:00). This made sure students had been following
along with the class discussion, and had little to no room for error. Even though some of them

left for lunch still confused, we knew the class was understanding some of the content by how

our discussions went.

Taking both the formative assessments and the classroom discussions into

consideration, we were able to see student misconceptions, and use them to guide our lesson

to best help our students. We realized how we would really need to go in depth when

introducing cubing and cube roots when students were still confused with squaring (0:19).

Students did not know the correct answer for 32 . We heard students yelling out 1.5, which is 3

÷ 2. This lead us to asking another squaring question, to verify students were just rushing and

not taking the time to work through the answer. This proved true, as students knew the answer

to the second question.

3
Rushing to an answer was seen again in class, when we asked students for √8 . We

asked students to show us the answer on their fingers. We decided to call on the student who

was one of the firsts to put up his hand, and he did not know how he got his answer

(6:00-6:05). While some of the students giggled, we said it was ok and asked another student.

Rushing turns out to be a big issue for these students, as a lot of them just want to be done.
3
Another issue for students is vocabulary, as the student who got the correct answer to √8 said

the inverses of his own math (6:07). These students are smart, they just need to take the time

to think through their answers and how they got to them.

To determine our lesson plan, we analyzed the students progress and past areas of

learning in Connected Math. The students have been moving through the Connected Math

curriculum throughout this school year, guiding their lessons and learning. This particular day,
the students were required to learn section 2.4: Cube Roots. Earlier this week, students had

been learning abouts squares, squaring, and square roots, and were beginning to feel

comfortable with this idea. We decided to use these ideas when teaching about cubing and

cube roots, so the students could reference their prior knowledge to help them.

Throughout the lesson, we were periodically checking in with students having them tell

us how they were doing at that point with a thumbs up, somewhere in the middle, or thumbs

down. This is the form of formative assessment we chose to utilize throughout the period. We

also told students that at if any point they wanted us to stop, clarify, or re-teach anything we

would be willing to do so. In addition, we walked around the classroom while students were

working and asked students how they were doing, if they had any questions, etc. By having

students draw on the desks, we were easily able to see who was understanding the material

and who was not. This was also the case when the students were working on their worksheet.

At the end of the period, we gave the students one final question, as an exit-ticket. The

students had to complete one math question regarding cubing and cube roots, and let us know

how they were feeling about this topic on a scale from 1-5. If we were continuing to teach

beyond this lesson, we would review the students work on their exit-tickets and use these to

guide our future lesson plans. For example, if the majority of students scored their level of

understanding at a 1-3 level, we would plan a mini-lesson to go over the material again.

Abby: I thought there were a lot of things we did well with in our lesson, and a lot of

things we could have improved on. When it came to the math, I think we did a really good job.

We used a bell ringer as a formative assessment and questioned the kids and evaluated where

they were at with the material using a thumbs up, thumb in the middle, or thumbs down
method. As summative assessment, we used an exit ticket. This would have been a good way

for us to assess the students and see what they still needed to work on and what we could’ve

improved on as teachers, for the future. “​A good exit ticket can tell whether students have a

superficial or in-depth understanding of the material. Teachers can then use this data for

adapting instruction to meet students' needs the very next day” (Park, 2015). If I were to teach

this lesson again I would think about how long it would take for the class to transition from task

to task. Ellie and I created a full lesson plan and it ended up being difficult to get through

because of the amount of time it took to quiet the kids down and get them back on task in

between transition times. “The students’ independence in their math work rests on a climate of

acceptance and mathematical risk-taking” (Inside Mathematics, 2017). I believe Ellie and I

created this kind of environment and tried our best for our students to succeed, but there was

only so much we could control in a classroom that we had not set up the rules and expectations

for, as classroom management was our biggest downfall.

Ellie: Our lesson had high highs and low lows. Our biggest struggle came from student

behavior, but these issues were because of our host teacher’s classroom management. The

content we taught and the way we did so went really well. I believe Abby and I did a great job

to support each individual class. Using formative assessments as often as possible to check in

and teach accordingly was very useful, and proved to have an impact on these students. We

used an exit ticket as our summative assessment, and found a wide range of understanding of

the topic. This information and “this strategy is extremely useful in the classroom because it

takes just a few moments to do, and gives teachers an informal measure of the students’

understanding of a new lesson or concept” (Alber, 2006). I wish I could have taught a follow up
lesson, using the information from this summative assessment to guide the upcoming lessons. I

would also implement ESSA from the beginning, because “now is the time for our mathematics

education community to do what we can to ensure that state plans adequately support

teachers and the teaching of mathematics” (NCTM, 2017). With this support, I feel as though I

would have the resources I need to best teach my students. I don’t think I would have changed

anything specifically about our lesson, because our biggest issues stemmed from the way the

host teacher sets up our class. So if I had control from the beginning, the lesson itself would

have been better.

*we know our word count is slightly over the 2000 limit, but this is because there are two of us,

and we each needed to have a reflection. That is the only reason we went over.*

References

Albers, Peggy. "Imagining the Possibilities in Multimodal Curriculum Design." English Education

2nd ser. 38.N (2006): 75-101. Web. Retrieved November 13, 2017.
NCTM, The Math Teachers' Circle Network, & The Association of State Supervisors of

Mathematics. (n.d.). Every Student Succeeds Act - ESSA Toolkit. Retrieved November 13, 2017,

from http://www.nctm.org/essatoolkit/

Park, Allison. Exit Tickets: Checking for Understanding. George Lucas Educational Foundation.

Edutopia, (2015). Web. Retrieved November, 13 2017.

Inside Mathematics. Mentors of Mathematical Practice. (2017). Web. Retrieved November 14,

2017.