Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2. How much time is devoted each day to mathematics instruction in your classroom?
3. Identify any textbook or instructional program the teacher uses for mathematics instruction.
If a textbook, please provide the title, publisher, and date of publication.
4. From your observations, list other resources (e.g., electronic whiteboard, manipulatives,
online resources) the teacher uses for mathematics instruction in this class. P
rovide one
example of how a resource was used to teach a concept.
-Base Ten Blocks were used to model the relationship of hundredths, tenths, and one
whole for teaching decimals.
5. From your observations, explain how your teacher makes sure the students learn the
standard/objectives conceptually giving a specific example.
-My teacher uses strategic small groupings to target the specific weaknesses that
students show through their work on exit tickets. The groupings for the rotations change
everyday based on the students performance the day before. Two of the other math rotations
will also have work that will allow students to individually or in groups practice the math skill
that they are working on (Partner group and Math Challenge group).
6. What did you learn most about teaching mathematics from observing this teacher?
-What I learned most was that sometimes you have to evaluate how your students are
doing and understanding a concept, and then reteach if necessary. For example, I was asked to
teach on comparing fractions because my cooperating teacher knew that she had some
students that were still struggling with comparing fractions. I learned that, since mathematics
skills build upon one another, sometimes it is necessary to slow down or take a step back so
that students have a good foundation to build upon.
2. State the CCSSM Standard and the objective for your whole class lesson.
-4.NF.A.2- Compare two fractions with different numerators and different denominators,
e.g., by creating common denominators or numerators, or by comparing to a benchmark
fraction such as 1/2. Recognize that comparisons are valid only when the two fractions refer to
the same whole. Record the results of comparisons with symbols >, =, or <, and justify the
conclusions, e.g., by using a visual fraction model.
3. Instructional Strategies and Learning Tasks: (summarize the lesson plan components by
briefly describing the instruction and the learning tasks you used. Include the tasks students will
solve during the lesson.)
-I reviewed different strategies for comparing fractions with the students (creating
fraction models, comparing to benchmark fractions, and creating common denominators). The
students then played “Fraction War”, which is played like the card game. Students each got half
of a deck of pre-made cards with fractions written on them. Each student flips a card. The
students then must compare the fraction to determine which fraction is larger. The student with
the larger fraction gets to have both cards. If the fractions are equivalent, each student gets one
card. I also required students to write down the number sentence of each pair of cards, using
the correct <, =, or > symbol. I then called the students back together to discuss the activity. I
asked them if there were any fractions that they had a difficult time with and if there were times
that a partner group disagreed upon which fraction was larger. I then again reviewed the
strategies that they can use to compare fractions. Students were then given an exit ticket to
access their understanding.
5. Define your evaluation criteria for mastery of the assessment in a rubric. Make sure you
define separately conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and problem solving parts of
this rubric, including the corresponding points. Insert this rubric here.
- Procedural Fluency: 2 Points- Did the students come to the right answer?
-Problem Solving: 4 Points- Did the student write out a number sentence and use the <,
=, or > symbols?
A 2 0 4 6
B 4 2 4 10
C 4 2 4 10
D 2 0 4 6
E 0 0 4 4
F 4 2 4 10
G 2 0 4 6
H 2 0 4 6
I 2 0 2 4
J 2 0 4 6
K 4 2 4 10
L 2 0 4 6
M 0 0 4 4
2. Describe common error patterns in each of the areas of patterns of learning - conceptual
understanding, procedural fluency, and problem solving. Refer to the graphic to support your
discussion.
Two out of Thirteen students demonstrated no conceptual understanding in their
response and 7 out of 13 students demonstrated some procedural fluency in their response.
The two students who did not demonstrate procedural fluency did not draw a fraction model.
The sentences they wrote did not demonstrate any understanding of how they came to the
answer they did. The seven students who partly demonstrated procedural fluency drew fraction
models and drew them correctly. However, they still came to the conclusion that ⅔ > than ⅘. This
demonstrates that while they can draw a fraction model, they do not conceptually understand
how to use the model to compare fractions.
Nine of the Thirteen students did not demonstrate procedural fluency. I gave them two
fractions to compare that are close (⅔ and ⅘). The comparison of these fractions required
students to think more critically about the sizes of a part of a whole. These students do not
understand that in a fraction comparison where each fraction is one part away from making a
whole, the whole that is broken into the most parts (in this case ⅘) is the larger fraction, because
the parts are smaller.
Twelve of the Thirteen students were able to demonstrate problem solving. These
students are well verse at writing number sentences and using the <, =, and > symbols. The one
student who got partial credit for problem solving wrote the fractions down but did not write a
symbol in between. This student has been able to use these symbols before, so I believe he got
distracted in his work or was rushing to complete his exit ticket.
3. Scan and insert here the copies of 2 students first work samples as follows. Choose the
most representative examples from the whole class assessment (no student names). Then,
analyze each student’s misconceptions.
Student 1 Mathematics Work Sample ( student struggles with conceptual understanding)
Student E
This student struggles with conceptual understanding. He drew no fraction model to
help him reason through the problem and his sentence does not explain his reasoning, rather it
is just rewriting the number sentence out into a sentence. He also changes his answer when
writing out the sentence. This makes me believe that the student is guessing rather than using
reasoning to come to an answer.
Student 2 Mathematics Work Sample ( student struggles with procedural fluency or problem
solving)
This student struggles with both procedural fluency and problem solving. He does not fill
in his answer in his number sentence. He received partial credit for problem solving setting up
the number sentence, but not completing it. While he does write a sentence explaining his
thinking, his thinking is flawed. This student seems to think that just because both numbers are
above ½, that means they are the same. He needs additional instruction to better understand
that two fractions can be similar but not necessarily the same.
Section D: Plan for Re-Engagement
Assessment results are irrelevant if you do not act on them. Thus, you are to create a plan to
use the results you described in Part C. You do not have to actually re-engage the students but
you must show that you understand what to do with these results. Thus, based on the
assessment results you described above, group each of your students into one of these groups:
Group 1 - re-engage for conceptual
Group 2 - re-engage for procedural
Group 3 - re-engage for problem solving
Group 4 - mastery/ready to move on
1. Describe the number of students you will have in each of these groups. (Note: if a child
performed poorly in multiple parts of the assessment, that child will start in the conceptual
group)
Group 1- Conceptual- Students D, I, and M
Group 2- Procedural Fluency- Student A, D, G, H, J, and L
Group 3- Problem Solving- None, need to start at conceptual
Group 4- Mastery- Students B, C, F, and K
2. Plan to re-engage for conceptual understanding.
a. Describe your re-engagement lesson for this group (objective from CCSSM, learning
tasks, strategies, materials, assessment).
-The CCSSM will be the same as above (4.NF.A.2). The teacher will model
drawing fraction models and using them to solve fraction comparison problems. The
students will each get a different fraction and then draw a fraction model of that
fraction. The students, guided by the teacher, will then compare these fractions to one
another to determine which one is the largest, which is the smallest, and which is in
between. This will be repeated several times. The students will individually complete and
exit ticket where they will draw fraction models for two fractions and then compare them
to determine which is larger.
Materials: dry erase boards, dry erase markers, exit ticket, pencils.
b. Explain why you believe this re-engagement lesson will be effective based on the
error patterns you found in the data. Score here will be based on how well you describe
the connection to the re-engagement lesson and the error patterns found, effective use
of materials, and sound methodology.
-I believe the additional practice of drawing fraction models and the reasoning
that goes on with drawing those models will help these students be more successful in
their problem conceptual understanding of comparing fractions.
c. Explain how you will reassess for mastery of the concept.
-I will have students complete an exit ticket where they must draw a fraction
model for each fraction. They will then use those fraction models to determine which
fraction is larger. They will complete a number sentence using <, =, and > symbols. The
fractions they will be comparing are 3/6 and ⅞.
3a. Plan to Re-engage for procedural understanding.
a. Describe your re-engagement lesson for this group (objective from CCSSM, learning
tasks, strategies, materials, assessment).
The CCSM will be the same as above (4.NF.A.2). The students will be given a
series of fractions along with the corresponding fraction models. The teacher will
demonstrate the thinking process of evaluating fraction models. The lesson will include
fraction models where the model does not provide a clear answer. The teacher will
model thinking where in using common numerators or denominators in comparing
fractions. Students will work with partners to answer a series of fraction comparison
number sentences in which the fraction models are included. Some they will be able to
solve using the number sentences and some they will have to go a step further and use
common denominators or common numerators in order to solve the problem. The
assessment will be an exit ticket where they will be asked to compare two fractions
where the fraction models are provided. They will be asked to explain their thinking in a
sentence.
Materials: Fraction Model Sheet, pencils, exit tickets
b. Explain why you believe this re-engagement lesson will be effective based on the
error patterns you found in the data. Score here will be based on how well you describe
the connection to the re-engagement lesson and the error patterns found, effective use
of materials, and sound methodology.
-While these students do not have a problem drawing fraction models, they have
difficulties using them to come to the correct answer. I believe that additional instruction in the
use of fraction models and comparing numerators/denominators will be beneficial to helping
these students come to the correct answers.
c. Explain how you will reassess for mastery of the concept.
-I will use an exit ticket where they are asked to compare ⅚ and ⅝. They will be
given the fraction models on the exit ticket. I will require the students to write a sentence
explaining how they came to their answer.
Scoring Rubric
Possible
Points