STEP Standard 2 - Writing Standards-Based Objectives and the

Learning Goal

Unit Topic: Calculated and Estimated Volume of Rectangular Prisms

Unit Title: Understanding Volume

National or State Academic Content Standards

5.MD.C.3.a - A cube with side length 1 unit, called a "unit cube," is said to have "one cubic unit"
of volume, and can be used to measure volume.
5.MD.C.3.b – A solid figure which can be packed without gaps or overlaps using n unit cubes is
said to have a volume of n cubic units.
5.MD.C.4 – Measure volume by counting unit cubes, using cubic cm, cubic in, cubic ft, and
improvised units.
5.MD.C.5 - Relate volume to the operations of multiplication and addition and solve real world
and mathematical problems involving volume

Learning Goal
Calculate the volume of a rectangular prism given its dimensions and estimate the approximate
volume of a rectangular prism with improvised units.

Measurable Objectives
Accurately count the unit cubes in a 2-D representation of a solid 3-D figure.
Accurately calculate the volume of a rectangular prism using the V=lwh formula and its given
dimensions.
Understand the difference between cubic cm, in, ft, and unit cubes.
Estimate the volume of a rectangular prism using real and improvised units.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 1 of 18

STEP Standard 3 - Assessment and Data Literacy
Pre-Assessment - Copy and paste the pre-assessment you plan to use to assess the
students’ knowledge of the topic prior to implementing the unit lessons. Include the
scoring criteria used to determine whether the student Exceeds, Meets, Approaches,
or Falls Far Below the learning goal and measurable objectives.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 2 of 18

 Pre-Assessment Data: Whole Class - Once you have assessed your students’ knowledge on the topic,
collect and analyze the pre-assessment data to determine if you will need to modify the standards,
learning goal, or measurable objectives that will be addressed during instruction.

Number of Students

Exceeds 0

Meets 0

Approaches 0

Falls Far Below 25

Pre-Assessment Analysis: Whole Class

Based on the data above, what changes, if any, will you make to your selection of national or state
academic content standards, the learning goal, or measurable objectives?
My Cooperating Teacher insisted on using her pre-assessment page for the Geometry unit, which
doesn’t correspond to every single standard I planned to address in my unit, but there is plenty of
overlap. I did not expect the students to do well on it, and this turned out to be true. Every student
scored either a 1 or a 0. This was given in the first week of school after two and half months of
summer vacation. If they did have any prior knowledge, it didn’t show.
Based on the data above, describe in 1-3 paragraphs the effect this data could have on the planning,
delivery, and assessment of your unit.
I do not plan on changing anything about my unit because I already planned to approach it with
the assumption of little if any prior knowledge. The only prior knowledge demonstrated was in
some common errors on the pretest of students adding the dimensions of shapes together, or
manipulating them as though they were being asked for area rather than volume. For the purposes
of this assignment, the unit is to be presented as lasting a week, but the reality is that I have been
teaching it for a month now in very short mini lessons, as this is the format my Cooperating
Teacher has given me to work with. In keeping with the parameters of the STEP assignment
formatting, it will be presented as a very dense week-long unit, but realistically it can and should be
extended for students new to these concepts to effectively learn them.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 3 of 18

 Post-Assessment – Copy and paste the post-assessment you plan to use to assess the students’ knowledge
of the topic after implementing the unit lessons. The post-assessment can be the same as the pre-
assessment, a modified version, or something comparable that measures the same concepts. Include the
scoring criteria used to determine whether the student Exceeds, Meets, Approaches, or Falls Far Below the
learning goal and measurable objectives.

The scoring criteria is borrowed from my Cooperating Teacher. Every graded assignment
in her class is given a score from 0-4. These are based on depth of knowledge. A 0 score

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 4 of 18

 would be for not doing any work at all; either not turning it in or turning it in with only
their name written on it. A 1 would be falling far below the learning goal but at least
making an effort, 2 is approaching (they ‘kind of’ get it), 3 is meeting (all answers are
correct, but deeper understanding is not demonstrated), and 4 is exceeding (all answers are
correct and explanations demonstrate deeper understandings). In my cooperating
classroom, it is understood that to get a 4 you have to find ways to extend the problem and
prove to the teacher that you understand it completely by showing your work in more than
one way or coming up with novel ideas related to the problem. The mathematical problems
within this assignment have clear-cut right or wrong answers, but the student’s opportunity
to explain their thinking is where the difference between a level 3 and a level 4 is
determined.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 5 of 18

STEP Standard 4 - Unit and Lesson Planning
Note: When implementing the unit of study, you will be choosing one of these activities to video record, review, and reflect on your teaching later
in the STEP process,

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

Title of Lesson or Building structures Finding volume of Estimating volume Sense or Nonsense? Volume Posters and
Activity with linking cubes rectangular prisms with improvised Assessment
units
Standards and 5.MD.C.4 5.MD.C.3.a 5.MD.C.4 5.MD.C.5 5.MD.C.4
Objectives Measure volumes A cube with side Measure volumes Relate volume to Measure volumes
What do students by counting unit length 1 unit, called by counting unit the operations of by counting unit
need to know and cubes, using cubic a "unit cube," is cubes, using cubic multiplication and cubes, using cubic
be able to do for cm, cubic in, cubic said to have "one cm, cubic in, cubic addition and solve cm, cubic in, cubic
each day of the ft, and improvised cubic unit" of ft, and improvised real world and ft, and improvised
unit? units. volume, and can be units. mathematical units.
Objective: SWBAT used to measure Objective: SWBAT problems involving 5.MD.C.3.a
use linking cubes to volume. estimate the volume volume A cube with side
build a structure Objective: SWBAT of a rectangular Objective: SWBAT length 1 unit, called
based on a picture. find the volume of prism using real choose appropriate a "unit cube," is
a rectangular prism and improvised strategies to find said to have "one
using its units. the exact or cubic unit" of
dimensions. estimated volume volume, and can be
of a rectangular used to measure
prism. volume.
5.MD.C.5
Relate volume to
the operations of
multiplication and
addition and solve
real world and
mathematical

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 6 of 18

 problems involving
volume
Objective: SWBAT
demonstrate
mastery of
calculating the
volume or
estimated volume
of rectangular
prisms and
understanding the
difference between
different cubic unit
measurements.
Academic One dimensional, V = lwh, formula, V = Bh, improvised Skip count One dimensional,
Language and two dimensional, plugin, solution, units, layers two dimensional,
Vocabulary three dimensional, rectangular prism, three dimensional,
What academic unit cube, volume cube, face, edge, unit cube, volume,
language will you vertex V = lwh, formula,
emphasize and plugin, solution,
teach each day rectangular prism,
during this unit? cube, face, edge,
vertex, V = Bh,
improvised units,
layers, skip
counting,
alternative
strategies
Summary of Students are Students are Students are asked Students are shown Students work in
Instruction and engaged by being introduced to the how we could find a “Math on the groups and rotate
Activities for the shown a slide of the concept of cubes, the volume of a Spot” video from every three minutes
Lesson Great Pyramid of rectangular prisms, ream of copy paper. the GOMath between 8 posters
Giza and asked and the associated After being guided curriculum walking on the walls around

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 7 of 18

 How will the what they think the vocabulary using a to apply their through the steps of the room with
instruction and first step was in box of individually previous a higher-level word volume word
activities flow? making it. They are packaged instant knowledge to the problem involving problems on them.
Consider how the guided towards noodles and plastic task as a class, they estimated volume. They try to solve
students will seeing that geometry are asked how we They are asked to the problems in
efficiently transition structures must start manipulatives. might use this use a blank page in their Geometry
from one to the with an idea, They are given the information to their Geometry notebooks then
next. followed by volume formula estimate the volume notebooks to try to write out the steps
blueprints, and shown how to of the copy paper work ahead of the on the posters.
diagrams, and/or use it to find box. After video and compare When they rotate to
models. This is volume. They have discussion, they are their work to the new posters, they
further illustrated guided practice out shown how to steps illustrated. either check the last
with pictures of of the GOMath calculate the Afterwards, we group’s work and
diagrams and a curriculum, work number of reams of discuss the answers write an
scale model of the with partners and paper that fit into and other ways we explanation why
Villa Rotunda have linking cubes the box using the could use to find they were or were
followed by images as manipulatives. volume formula volume of not correct,
of the real building. and introduced to rectangular prisms continue previous
They are told that the concept of besides the two group’s unfinished
they will go improvised units formulas they’ve work, or try to
through a similar and the alternative learned. They are come up with
process today on a volume formula guided toward skip alternative ways to
much smaller scale V=Bh. They follow counting the solve the problem
by building 3D along, doing improvised units in depending on what
structures with calculations on a layer and they find written by
linking cubes based their whiteboards. applying number the previous
on the 2D Students do manipulation groups. After all
depictions on their additional problems strategies they have groups have been to
worksheet. They from the GOMath been learning from all posters, we
will find the curriculum. the Cooperating discuss things they
volume of these Teacher. The lesson learned from the
structures by is closed out by activity, then they
counting the linking doing 3 problems do their summative

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 8 of 18

 cubes used. We will from the GOMath assessment after a
define unit cubes curriculum in a recess break.
and volume. ‘race against the
teacher.’ Teacher
does problems
under the document
camera and
students work
through the same
problems at the
same time
attempting to
complete them
more quickly than
the teacher.
Differentiation All ELs in this class Higher level ELs are always No text reading is Our EL with the
What are the are proficient in students work partnered with required for ELs. lowest literacy is
adaptations or listening to and independently in a native speakers so given the problems
modifications to the speaking English. group in the that word problems on a piece of paper
instruction/activities Visual aids and hallway after initial can be read to and they are read
as determined by realia are sufficient. introduction of them. and explained to
the student factors Advanced students concepts, then him.
or individual have the option to come back to check
learning needs? build additional work with the rest
shapes and draw of the class after
the structures with finishing. All
the volume listed. students have realia
examples and
manipulatives.
Required Linking cubes, GOMath GOMath GOMath online Large poster paper,
Materials, slides of Egyptian curriculum curriculum curriculum, class set of
Handouts, Text, pyramid, slides of workbooks, linking workbooks, pencils, GOMath markers, tape,
the Villa Rotunda, cubes, plastic whiteboards, dry curriculum pencils, notebooks,

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 9 of 18

 Slides, and blueprints, scale geometric models, erase markers, dry workbooks, summative
Technology model, and actual 12 pack of cup of erase board erasers, notebooks, pencils, assessment
building, noodles, pencils, notebooks, projector, laptop worksheets.
worksheets, whiteboards, dry highlighters, 1
document camera, erase markers, dry packaged ream of
projector erase board erasers, copy paper, ruler,
notebooks, empty copy paper
highlighters, box, document
document camera, camera, projector
projector
Instructional and Anticipatory set, Realia, Realia, activating Video relating prior Comparing peer
Engagement realia, manipulatives, prior knowledge, knowledge to real strategies, out of
Strategies manipulatives, partner work partner work world problems, seat partner work
What strategies are partner work comparing peer
you going to use strategies, making a
with your students game out of solving
to keep them volume.
engaged throughout
the unit of study?
Formative Informal Checking student Checking student Students give Teacher rotates
Assessments assessment work on work on informal feedback among groups
How are you going throughout guided whiteboards. whiteboards. through giving a throughout poster
to measure the practice. thumbs up if they activity and checks
learning of your Independently arrived at the same their work,
students throughout completed answer as the video monitoring progress
the lesson? problems on before the and/or clarifying
worksheet are conclusion of the misconceptions.
analyzed and problem.
results recorded.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 10 of 18

 Summative, Post-
Assessment
What post-
assessment will
measure the
learning progress?
Note: This can be
the same as the pre-
assessment or a
modified version of
it.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 11 of 18

 This is the summative assessment with scoring criteria is borrowed from my Cooperating Teacher.
Every graded assignment is given a score from 0-4. These are based on depth of knowledge. A 0 score
is for not doing any work at all; either nothing turned in or a paper where the only relevant or
intelligible thing written is the student’s name. A 1 is falling far below standard but still making an
attempt, 2 is approaching (they ‘kind of’ get it), 3 is meeting (all answers are correct, but deeper
understanding is not demonstrated), and 4 is exceeding (all answers are correct and explanations
demonstrate deeper understandings). In my cooperating classroom, it is understood that to get a 4 you
have to find ways to extend the problem and prove to the teacher that you understand it completely by
showing your work in more than one way or coming up with novel ideas related to the problem. The
mathematical problems within this assignment have clear-cut right or wrong answers, but the
student’s opportunity to explain their thinking is where the difference between a level 3 and a level 4 is
determined.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 12 of 18

STEP Standard 5 - Implementation of Instructional Unit
Video Recording Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78vIXyRtrQE&feature=youtu.be

Summary of Unit Implementation:

Lesson 1
The first lesson was designed to get students interested in imagining two dimensional diagrams as
three dimensional structures. They were guided towards seeing how impressive structures like the Great
Pyramid of Giza can begin as a two-dimensional diagram. They then built simple 3-D structures with
linking cubes based on diagrams of rectangular prisms where volume is found by counting cubic units.
The pictures and use of manipulatives with partners successfully engaged students and many were able to
achieve the goal of accurately building the prisms depicted on their worksheets, though not all.
Lesson 2
Students continued using linking cubes with partners in this lesson. They learned more academic
vocabulary and the mathematical formula for calculating volume. As an anticipatory set, I used a bulk
package of cup of noodles to represent unit cubes. Students were shown how counting the dimensions and
multiplying them with the formula could allow them to find the volume of a solid rectangular prism
without having to see and count every individual cube. Not all went according to plan, as a group of
academically higher students who were allowed to work independently while the remainder of the class
was in guided instruction stalled out over group dynamics. Partner work with linking cubes continued to
be successfully engaging for the rest of the class.
Lesson 3
Students were guided to estimating volume with improvised units. The hook was finding the
volume of a copy paper box by measuring the dimensions of a single ream of paper, applying the volume
formula, then seeing how many reams fit into a box. Students worked on individual whiteboards during
guided practice, then worked in groups with book problems.
Lesson 4
Students worked along with an estimated volume video in their geometry notebook to check their
own understanding followed by discussion and comparison of strategies they applied. This lesson ended
with a ‘race against the teacher’ on 3 problems from the GOMath curriculum, which was highly engaging
to students.
Lesson 5
This lesson was a review and practice of previous lessons and further comparison of peer
strategies. Students did a ‘gallery walk’ in groups, working on volume word problems. They completed,
revised, corrected, and / or looked for different strategies to come to the same answer for each problem as
their classmates. Afterwards, we discussed what we learned, and then did the summative assessment.
Summary of Student Learning:
I’m satisfied with the level of student learning from this unit. None of the students had an
accurate concept of volume to start with, but by the end, the most had a reasonable understanding. One
common misunderstanding I discovered early on was students getting confused about whether to count
unit cubes on the corners of rectangular prisms twice. I discovered this while re-teaching small groups
who did badly on the first assessment. I explained to them how the corner cubes could be counted twice
because they were part of both length and width.
Reflection of Video Recording:
I have plenty of room for improvement. One thing I can pick on from the video is being more
concise and complete in my instructions and checking understanding before moving into activities. I
found myself repeating many of the same directions as I checked on groups. I also forgot at first to tell

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 13 of 18

students what to do on posters where all work was already done correctly. I corrected this partway
through the activity, though I cut it from the video for time.

A strength is students finding me approachable when they need help. However, I think
this is a double-edged sword because they are often too comfortable and like to test me. I could
improve this by working on classroom management skills. My cooperating school has a PBIS
system which I have been trying out with a particular student who has given me a difficult time
in the past, and so far it is working well. I will need to continue this and learn to respond more
actively to minor misbehaviors which can grow into larger problems when left unchecked.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 14 of 18

STEP Standard 6 - Analysis of Student Learning

Post-Test Data: Whole Class - Once you have assessed your students’ learning on the topic, collect and
analyze the post-test data to determine the effectiveness of your instruction and assessment.
Number of Students Number of Students
Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 0 7

Proficient
(80%-89%) 0 10

Partially
Proficient
0 8
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
24 0
(69% and below)

Post-Test Analysis: Whole Class

Based on the analysis of the post-test data, every student came out far ahead of where they started. Not a
single student was proficient on the pre-test. This was expected, as the concept of volume was new to
them. In the post-test, not a single student failed. The lowest scores were 70%. Broken down further than
the above table allows, the scores were as follows: 4 students scored 70%, 4 students scored 75%, 2
students scored 80%, and 7 students scored 90%. My Cooperating Teacher and I are very pleased with the
results.
The instruction was extremely effective. The whole class went from no understanding to a C level
or better. This may sound too good to be true, but it must be pointed out that instruction was
given over the course of about a month. The unit plan as contained in this document condenses
the main activities and subjects into the span of a week as per the assignment requirements. In
reality, instruction was given in 20-minute lessons 3 times a week and one 40-minute lesson once
per week. One lesson on the week-long unit plan typically took 3-4 sessions to complete with
such short time slots available for teaching. I believe having more time to digest the material and
to respond to student learning benefited their understanding.
Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup Selection

I’ve chosen to select the students with the lowest scores of the whole class. These four students
scored 70% on their summative assessment. I believe the common factor between these students
besides their scores was low reading comprehension of the word problems on the summative
assessment. Two of the four are ELs, one is behind in reading, and one is suspected of having
attention issues which manifest and often not following directions or paying attention to details.
Post-Assessment Data: Subgroup (Gender, ELL population, Gifted, students on IEPs or 504s, etc.)

Number of Students Number of Students

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 15 of 18

 Pre-Test Post-Test

Exceeds 0 0

Meets 0 0

Approaches 0 4

Falls Far Below 4 0

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup

These students also learned successfully compared to where their understanding was during the
pre-test. They just scored lower than the rest of the class on the post-assessment. However, they
still had passing grades.
I personally checked in with two of the four students during RTI time to check their
understanding of the concepts on the post-assessment. My Cooperating Teacher checked the other
two. One of the two I checked is EL and the other requires frequent redirection to maintain focus.
I grade according to my Cooperating Teacher’s standards which are very high, so doing the math
correctly without showing the units of volume will cause a student to lose points. Both students I
checked with had the same problems – not writing the units and misunderstanding the word
problems. For the EL, this is a case of not advocating for herself when she does not understand
something. Her language understanding is high enough not to be pulled out for services, but she
rarely participates in class discussion or requests help. The other student frequently rushes
through work and neglects details. Both showed a good understanding of the concepts when I
checked with them during RTI. I reminded the EL that she needs to raise her hand if there are
things she doesn’t understand and reminded the other student to pay attention to details.
Post-Assessment Data: Remainder of Class

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Exceeds 0 7

Meets 0 10

Approaches 0 4

Falls Far Below 20

0

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 16 of 18

 Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup and Remainder of Class

The subgroup still showed improvement and understanding, but not to the same extent as the rest
of the class. They still had passing scores. I feel satisfied with the results of my instruction
considering none of the students demonstrated prior knowledge of the topic, and at least half of
the subgroup’s mistakes on the post-test were due to language misunderstandings.
One of the next steps for instruction is reminding ELs that they have the option of having word
problems read to and explained to them. I already make a point to read word problems aloud to
the whole class and ask if anyone would like clarification before students begin tests. Some good
follow-up objectives to build upon this unit are comparing volumes of different rectangular
prisms and finding the volume of composed figures.

STEP Standard 7 – Reflecting on Instruction to Improve Student

Progress
Improved Practice Based on the Unit of Study
Based on the experience of developing and delivering your instructional unit, list three short-
term goals to improve specific areas of your teaching practice based on the unit of instruction
and describe your plan to reach each short-term goal.

Plan to Reach the Goal (i.e., professional

Short-Term Goal development, research on the Internet,
observation of a veteran teacher, etc.)
1. Observe more teachers at my My Cooperating Teacher has suggested this
cooperating school. to me. All I’d really need to do is
communicate with some more of the other
teachers and compare schedules. I’ve already
made a few observations in other classrooms
to see other ways of doing things. Once my
cooperating classroom transitions back to my
Cooperating Teacher I will have plenty of
opportunity to do more of this.

2. Give more praise to positive I have to pay more attention to individual

behaviors. student behaviors and positively reinforce
when students make good behavior
decisions. This is particularly for students
that have had behavior issues. I’ve seen it
work for my Cooperating Teacher.

3. More scanning the classroom.
This ties into the previous goal, and it is
something my Cooperating Teacher
describes as ‘lifeguard eyes.’ My previous
Principal called it ‘head on a swivel.’ I need
to always be visually scanning the room. I

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 17 of 18

 easily get focused on one thing at a time
while teaching and don’t always look around
enough to make sure that all students are on
task.

© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Page 18 of 18