5 vistas

Cargado por api-382044937

guardar

- te 407 assessment assignment
- pbl intervention overview
- Educational Measurement Assessment and Evaluation
- [National Council of Teachers of Mathematics] Jour(BookFi.org)
- unit over view with innovation
- 2018 midyear exam task cover sheet
- smart goals worksheet 2
- Hastuti_Handayani
- Personalized Learning
- practicum topics - lesson 1
- written reflection 1
- Assessment.docx
- 9781107468917_Intro_001.pdf
- TSL3123 Language Assessment
- student teaching resume
- 441 l14 group project
- 393 bip final
- hannah burdick unit of study
- 20140929 t 18111602820926369 b
- Ramos Actividad 1.1 r.a.1.1
- AD2000_HP0_2013E
- Rúbrica Trabajo Estadistica
- DEBATE.pdf
- Componente Técnico_V3
- Unidad 1. Bioetica y Sustentabilidad Actividades
- christopher kellys resume
- OficioPreceptorF2
- deg15 csy3 mutants
- 04 SEAMEO 7 Priority Areas Implementation by Centres
- Modelo Bom de Curriculum
- S22 - Dimensión Social Comunitaria
- TALLER Tipos de comunicacion.pptx
- Scientists Move Closer to Understanding Schizophrenia’s Cause - The New York Times
- ORIENTACIONES PEDAGÓGICAS PARA EL GRADO DE TRANSICIÓN
- 2 MSSC Endpoint Protection Overview
- Psych Competency Trainees Guide
- ATS Library Accreditation
- DLL MIL 2nd Quarter Week2
- Caso Practico
- 267360726-Informe-Fonoaudiologico-TEL.docx
- Gestión Institucional y Su Relación Con La Calidad Del Servicio
- Writing Register Formal Informal
- Ensayo 1
- EDUCACIÓN A PACIENTES
- 4458
- Procedure for Opting for the Modified Training
- AWS_Elastic Load Balancing
- 2daSesForCTEPreescolar2017-18MEEP

Está en la página 1de 23

Portfolio

Hannah
Burdick

SPED
424

November
21,
2016

Table
of
contents

Description
for
unit
of
instruction

Pre-assessment

Pre-assessment
Results

Lesson
Plans

Post-assessment

Post-assessment
Results

Overall
reflection

Description
for
unit
of
instruction:

What
I
taught:

The
big
idea
of
what
I
expected
the
learners
to
understand
was
how
to
multiply.
In

order
to
help
them
learn
this
I
taught
them
the
Commutative
Property
of
Multiplication.

Beyond
what
I
was
assigned
to
do
during
this
process,
I
also
implemented
in
my
lesson
plans
for

the
students
to
identify
the
factors
and
product
of
a
problem
and
learn
how
to
figure
out
a

multiplication
problem
using
the
array
model.
The
big
idea
I
was
teaching
was
multiplication

using
standards
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5,
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3,
and

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4.

Why
I
taught
it:

After
speaking
with
our
students
teacher
she
informed
my
partner
and
I
that
we
had
a

group
of
students
who
were
functioning
below
their
peers
and
needed
help
in
learning
their

multiplication.
Once
I
discussed
this
with
my
partner
we
decided
our
students
most
likely

lacked
a
foundational
understanding
of
what
multiplication
is
and
its
relationship
to
addition.

Using
the
array
model
we
taught
them
that
multiplication
is
a
method
used
to
add
multiple

groups
of
numbers
together.
Once
they
understood
the
structure
of
a
multiplication
problem;

having
two
or
more
factors
and
a
product
and
knowing
how
to
make
a
picture
of
a

multiplication
problem
we
felt
that
they
would
be
able
to
work
towards
the
actual

memorization.

Pre-assessment:

The
goal
of
a
pre
assessment
is
to
have
a
reference
point
of
where
students
are
at

academically
in
order
to
create
a
lesson
plan
and
instruction
method
to
best
meet
their
needs.

Additionally,
it
provides
insight
into
what
has
been
mastered
and
what
information
still
needs

attention.
The
pre-assessment
scores
will
be
compared
to
a
post
assessment
to
determine
the

growth
which
has
taken
place
based
on
the
standards
used
for
instruction.

Reliability,
Validity
and
Bias:

As
a
whole
our
test
was
reliable,
valid,
and
unbiased.
There
was
one
matching
question

that
did
not
have
the
correct
answer
to
be
matched
with.
As
a
result,
that
question
needed
to

be
taken
out
and
not
counted
towards
our
students
scores
because
it
was
impossible
to
get

that
part
of
the
question
correct
and
therefore
not
assess
their
knowledge.

Administration
conditions:

The
test
was
administered
on
Monday
November
7th,
2016
via
an
individual
worksheet.

The
students
were
given
roughly
45
minutes
to
complete
the
assessment,
which
was

significantly
more
time
than
necessary.
Every
student
completed
the
assessment
within
a

twenty-minute
time
frame
which
left
time
for
us
to
do
an
activity
using
playdough.

Pre-assessment
(TEACHER
COPY):

Directions:
Solve
the
equation,
write
the
answer
below.

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

Solve
the
equation

1. 3
x
1
=
3

2. 3
x
5
=
15

3. 6
x
8
=
48

4. 6
x
9
=
54

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
(Commutative
and
Distributive
property)

Re-write
the
problems
using
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication.

5. 3
x
4
=
12

4
x
3
=
12

6. 2
x
4
=
8

4
x
2
=
8

7.
4
x
9
=
36

9
x
4
=
36

8. 2
divided
by
0
=
0

9. 2
divided
by
1
=
2

Test
Items
Standard
represented

1
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

2
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

3
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

4
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

5
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

6
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

7
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

8
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

9
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

Standard
Test
items
that
assess
that
Standard

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4
1,
2,
3,
4

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
5,
6,
7,
8,
9

Pre-assessment
reflection:

In
retrospect,
I
would
increase
the
number
of
questions
as
well
as
the
range
of

standards
used
so
that
it
would
better
reflect
what
the
students
know
and
do
not
know.
By

increasing
the
number
of
questions
and
standards
a
more
accurate
assessment
would
have

been
achieved
and
potentially
the
needs
of
the
students
would
have
been
better
met.

Pre-assessment
results:

According
to
the
data
in
table
3
the
mean
of
the
students
scores
was
52%,
the
median

is
44.4%,
and
the
mode
was
a
44.4%.
There
is
a
difference
of
3
points
between
the
highest
and

lowest
score
which
is
a
33.33%
range.

Data
Analysis:

Using
the
data
you
can
see
that
all
of
the
students
got
items
1,
2,
8,
and
9
correctly.
Those

questions
were
created
using
two
different
standards.
Given
the
data
we
can
see
that
what
the

students
do
understand
about
said
standards
they
understand
really
well.
For
example
they

understand
division
using
0
and
1,
which
is
Standard
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4.
But
the

same
standard
was
used
for
question
2
and
3
and
none
of
the
students
got
those
two
questions

correct.
The
second
standard
used
was
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
and
the
same

phenomenon
happened
with
the
test
items
modeled
after
that
standard.
All
four
students
got

questions
8
and
9
but
only
one
student
got
questions
5,
6,
and
7
correct.

Summary
of
Data:

Given
this
data
we
can
see
that
what
the
students
do
understand
about
each
standard
they

understand
really
well
such
as
division
using
0
and
2.
Whereas
the
parts
that
are
missing
in

their
understanding
such
as
multiplication
with
missing
factors
and
not
understanding
the

commutative
property
of
multiplication,
affected
virtually
every
student.

Table
1

Pre-Assessment
Item
scores

4

3

Students
Correct

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Table 2

Pre-Assessment:
Standards

12

10

8

Items

0

3.OA.A.4 3.OA.B.5

Standard

Table
3

Pre-Assessment
Overall
Score

9

8

7

6

5

Score

4

3

2

1

0

Brinlee

Taylor

Tino

Charly

Student

Reflection
of
results:

Based
on
the
pre-assessment
results
we
were
able
to
see
that
the
students
had

mastered
dividing
with
0
and
1.
Other
than
that
we
were
able
to
spend
our
time
specifically
on

multiplication
facts
and
skills.
This
adjusted
our
unit
design
by
allowing
us
two
lessons
for

multiplication
instead
of
one
lesson
on
multiplication
and
another
on
division
using
1
and
0.

Due
to
our
pre
assessment
data
results
I
determined
that
the
students
didnt
understand
the

basics
of
multiplication
including
the
terminology
and
also
that
multiplication
is
in
essence

repeated
addition.
As
a
result,
I
knew
that
it
would
require
that
I
include
teaching
with
visual

methods
including
drawing
out
full
pictures,
and
using
manipulatives
instead
of
teaching
them

tricks
for
just
memorizing
the
facts.

Lesson
plan
#1

Date
Taught:
11/14/16

Topic:
Representing
Multiplication
and
Division

Standard:
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3
and
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

Objectives:
SWBT
multiply
and
divide
whole
numbers
using
representational
strategies.
Also

recognize
an
unknown
number
in
an
equation
to
make
it
true.

Student-Friendly
Objective:
I
can
multiply
numbers
by
drawing
the
array
strategy.
I
can
divide

numbers
using
the
measurement
strategy.
I
can
find
the
missing
number
in
a
sentence
to
make

it
true.

Assessment
Plan:
Students
multiplied
and
divided
numbers
using
the
different
models.
Then

students
explained
the
model
to
their
partner.
As
a
group,
students
will
agree
with
thumbs
up
if

a
number
sentence
is
true
or
give
a
thumbs
down
if
it
isnt
true,
then
explain.

Materials
Needed:
White
boards,
markers

Key
Vocabulary:
Number
set,
array
model,
measurement
model

Anticipatory
Set
(Gain
attention/motivation/recall
prior
knowledge):

Where
do
you
use
multiplication?
And
division?
(5
minutes
group
discussion)

Examples:
teaching,
kickball
teams,
cutting
a
cake
at
a
birthday
party,
how
often
do
you

get
to
be
the
star
student
in
kindergarten
in
one
school
year
if
there
are
30
students,

how
often
do
you
get
to
feed
the
class
snake
in
1
school
a
year
if
there
are
30
students

Instructional
Inputs:

Q:
What
is
multiplication?
(Hannah
3-5
minutes)

A:
Multiplication
is
the
group
or
set
of
numbers
combined
with
another
set
of
numbers.

Q:
Are
the
numbers
getting
bigger
or
smaller?

A:
Yes!
Bigger

Q:
What
is
division?
(Mariah
3-5
minutes)

A:
Sharing
out
something
or
undoing
multiplying

Q:
Are
the
numbers
getting
bigger
or
smaller?

A:
Smaller

Modeling:

Hannah:
demonstrate
the
array
model
(Group
5-7
minutes)

Mariah:
demonstrate
measurement
division
(Group
5-7
minutes)

Guided
Practice:

Teacher:
Draw
four
multiplication
problems
using
the
array
model
on
the
white
board.

Student:
The
student
will
fill
in
the
blank
space
with
dots,
then
write
the
problem
out
using

standard
numbers.
Ex.
4x5=20

Explain
in
their
own
words
how
they
solved
the
problem.

Teacher:
Draw
four
division
problems
using
the
measurement
model
on
the
white
board.

Student:
The
student
will
count
how
many
equal
groups
can
be
made,
because
they
know
the

size
in
the
group.
Explain
in
their
own
words
how
they
solved
the
problem.

(The
number
you
start
with
divided
by
the
size
of
the
groups
equals
the
number
of
groups.)

Ex.
20
divided
by
4
people
in
in
each
group
equals
5
groups
total.

Closure:

Ticket
to
recess:
Students
will
be
given
a
multiplication
and
division
problem
to
shoot
in

a
basket
before
they
leave
class.

Students
will
receive
flash
cards
before
they
leave
the
class.

Independent
practice/application:

Using
flash
cards
students
will
practice
their
multiplication
and
division
facts
of
numbers
1-10.

Reflection:

Two
things
that
I
felt
went
well
were
the
use
of
manipulatives,
as
well
as
the
method
we

chose
to
teach
multiplication.
We
used
white
boards
and
the
array
model
to
better
meet

the
needs
of
this
particular
group
of
students
who
were
the
group
that
the
teacher
said

struggles
with
multiplication
still.
By
using
the
white
boards
and
markers
each
student
was

able
to
demonstrate
individually
the
concepts
we
were
teaching
and
also
having
a
sense
of

independence.
Using
the
array
model
we
gained
insight
into
what
the
students
did
and
did

not
understand
about
the
foundational
principles
involved
in
multiplication
which
is,
at
its

core,
repeated
addition.
The
visual
nature
of
the
array
model
allows
students
to
understand

better
that
multiplication
is
adding
a
group
or
groups
of
numbers
together
to
make
a
larger

number.

Additionally,
two
things
that
could
have
been
improved
were
our
co-teaching
and
our

time
management.
Due
to
an
inability
to
see
the
holes
in
our
lesson
prep
until
we
were

actually
teaching,
there
was
confusion
between
both
my
partner
and
I
as
to
the
direction

we
were
going
at
certain
points
and
this
in
turn
translated
to
confusion
on
the
students

part.
For
example,
I
was
initially
supposed
to
begin
with
a
specific
anticipatory
set,
through

talking
with
the
students
I
felt
that
it
may
be
better
to
discuss
what
multiplication
is
and

then
to
our
previously
planned
anticipatory
set.
Not
understanding
my
thought
process

Mariah,
tried
changing
the
direction
of
the
discussion
back
to
the
anticipatory
set.
Once
we

were
off
task
it
made
it
difficult
to
re-group.
Lastly,
our
time
management
as
a
team
was

not
as
we
had
planned.
The
intent
of
the
lesson
was
to
really
focus
on
division
with
a
short

introduction
of
multiplication.
We
spent
about
30-35
minutes
discussing
the
array
model
of

multiplication
and
about
five
minutes
of
division
which
left
only
two
minutes
for
our
exit

ticket
to
recess,
which
we
both
felt
like
would
have
been
a
fun
and
exciting
opportunity
for

the
students
to
go
over
what
they
learned
for
the
day.

My
suggestion
for
improvement
for
next
class
period
is
to
actually
role-play
our
lesson.

By
talking
to
each
other
prior
to
class
I
believe
we
will
find
the
holes
in
our
lesson
and
its

preparation
before
we
are
actually
in
front
of
the
students.
I
would
also
suggest
that
Mariah

and
I
discuss
an
effective
way
of
reminding
each
other
of
time
in
a
way
that
does
not

detract
from
the
lesson
or
side
track
students.
This
could
include
a
head
nod,
or
a
tap
on

the
wrist.

Commutative
property
of
multiplication

Lesson
Plan
#2

Date
Taught:
11/14/16

Topic:
Commutative
property
of
multiplication

Standard:
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
(Commutative
and
Distributive
property)

Objectives:
Teach
students
the
definition
of
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication.
Also

recognize
an
unknown
number
in
an
equation
to
make
it
true.

Student-Friendly
Objective:
I
know
the
definition
of
the
commutative
property
of

multiplication.

Assessment
Plan:
Students
will
be
able
to
explain
in
their
own
words
the
commutative

property
of
multiplication
then
match
notecards
with
their
complimentary
card
that
displays

the
commutative
property
of
addition.

Materials
Needed:
Flashcards,
whiteboards/markers,
pencils,
paper.

Key
Vocabulary:
array,
factors,
multiplication,
identity
property
of
multiplication,
product.

Anticipatory
Set
(Gain
attention/motivation/recall
prior
knowledge):

Walk
from
the
teachers
lounge
to
the
side
doors,
and
back
to
the
teachers
lounge.

Instructional
Inputs:

Q:
Is
going
from
the
teachers
lounge
to
the
side
doors
the
same
as
going
from
the
side

doors
to
the
teachers
lounge?

A:
Yes,
no
matter
which
location
you
started
at,
the
path
was
the
same.

Modeling:

Using
the
array
model
demonstrate
that
2
x
4=
4
x
2

Identify
the
product
and
the
factors.

Reiterate
that
when
you
switch
the
factors
you
always
get
the
same
product.

Guided
Practice:

Take
students
through
the
process
step-by-step

Components
to
help
students
successfully
master
or
take
steps
towards
mastery
of
the

objective

Include
checking
for
understanding
during
guided
practice;
how
will
you
check
for

understanding?

Using
the
equation
35
x
5
=
175,
show
them
the
equation
5
x
35
=
175
and
175
x
5
=
35

and
ask
which
of
the
two
represent
the
commutative
property.

Once
they
have
chosen
the
correct
answer,
have
the
students
create
their
own
problem

that
displays
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication.

Explain
to
students
that
there
are
notecards
around
the
room.
They
must
find
the

notecard
that
matches
the
notecard
they
have
been
given
that
displays
the

commutative
property
of
multiplication.
Whoever
finds
the
most
matches
wins.

Closure:

Review
or
summary
of
critical
objectives

Q:
Does
switching
the
order
of
the
factors
affect
the
product
in
a
multiplication

problem?

A:
No,
you
will
always
get
the
same
answer.

Q:
Why
is
knowing
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication
important?

A:
Because
you
are
able
to
memorize
double
the
multiplication
facts
by
understanding

order
doesnt
matter.

Independent
practice/application:

Students
will
explain
in
their
own
words
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication

then
match
notecards
with
the
complimentary
card
that
displays
the
commutative

property
of
addition.

Reflection:

In
the
execution
of
our
lesson
plan
today
two
things
that
went
well
were
our
activities,
and

our
co-teaching
strategy.
We
chose
to
begin
our
lesson
with
a
movement
activity,
which

displayed
how
a
student
can
commute
from
one
space
to
another
starting
from
two
different

places
and
still
get
to
the
destination.
They
were
therefore
able
to
make
that
same
connection

with
the
commutative
property.
No
matter
which
factor
they
started
with
they
would
still
get

the
same
product.
We
also
played
a
matching
game
in
the
gym,
which
not
only
gave
the

students
the
opportunity
to
practice
their
multiplication
facts
but
also
demonstrate
the

commutative
property
with
a
healthy
competition
between
classmates.

Two
things
that
could
have
been
improved
were
our
closure,
and
splitting
up
our
lesson

more
evenly
between
the
two
teachers.
Our
closure
activity
went
from
what
it
was
supposed
to

be,
which
was
reviewing
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication
and
its
related
vocabulary

to
introducing
a
new
topic
that
created
confusion
and
disorganization.
As
previously

mentioned,
in
addition
to
our
closure
I
felt
that
we
could
have
split
up
the
lesson
more
evenly

between
teachers
so
it
was
less
one
teach
one
assist
and
more
of
an
even
interaction
for
each

teacher
and
the
group
of
students.

Post-assessment:

A
post
assessment
is
used
to
compare
where
your
students
began
to
where
they
are
at

after
the
unit
has
been
taught.
By
using
a
post
assessment
you
gain
the
ability
to
see
the

effectiveness
of
your
teaching.
Furthermore,
you
can
better
adjust
your
instruction
to
fortify

their
foundational
understanding.
In
the
post
assessment
I
wanted
the
students
to
understand

the
terms:
factor,
product
and
Commutative
Property
of
Multiplication.
Additionally,
the

expectation
was
that
each
student
would
demonstrate
his
or
her
understanding
of
said
terms

by
whatever
means
the
instructor
feels
are
best.
This
may
include
multiple
means
of

representation
such
as
drawing,
verbally,
or
writing.

Reliability,
Validity,
and
Bias

The
post
assessment
was
reliable,
valid,
and
unbiased.
It
is
reliable
in
that
it
measures

the
standards
by
which
we
modeled
our
lessons.
For
example
standard

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3,
and
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4
were
used
in
the
first

lesson
plan
and
again
on
the
post
assessment
and
standard
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
was

used
on
the
second
lesson
plan
and
again
in
the
post
assessment.

Administration
conditions

The
post
assessment
was
again
administered
individually
and
on
a
worksheet.
Students

were
again
given
45
minutes
to
complete
the
assessment
and
had
more
time
than
was

necessary
to
finish
it.
All
students
completed
the
assessment
within
15
minutes.

Post
assessment
(TEACHER
COPY)

CCSS.Math.Content.3.OA.A.4

1. 5
X
7
=
35

2. 5
X
4
=
20

CCSS.Math.Content.3.OA.A.3

CCSS.Math.Content.3.OA.C.7

3. Using
the
array
model
show
3
X
4
=
12

OOOO

OOOO

OOOO

4. Circle
the
product
of
this
multiplication
problem

9
X
4
=
36

5. Using
the
array
model
show
what
the
product
of
4
X
5
=
20

OOOOO

OOOOO

OOOOO

OOOOO

CCSS.Math.Content.3.OA.B.5

6. Circle
which
of
these
problems
shows
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication.

A. 6
X
4
=
24

4
X
6=
24

B. 1
X
10
=
10

1
X
10
=
10

C. 8
X
4
=
32

4
X
32=
8

7. Give
your
own
example
of
a
multiplication
problem
that
shows
the
commutative

property
of
multiplication.

8. Circle
the
factors
of
the
multiplication
problem.

7
X
4
=
28

9. Fill
in
the
blank:

The
commutative
property
of
multiplication
means
you
can
switch
the
FACTORS
of
a

multiplication
problem
to
get
the
same
product.

Standard
Test
Items
that
Assess
that
Standard

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3
3,
4,
5

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4
1,
2

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5
6,
7,
8,
9,

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.C.7
3,
4,
5,

Test
Items
Standard
represented

1
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

2
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4

3
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.C.7

4
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.C.7

5
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.C.7

6
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

7
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

8
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

9
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5

Reflection:

If
given
the
opportunity
I
would
have
changed
the
wording
of
some
of
the
questions
on

the
assessment
so
as
to
make
it
more
age
appropriate.
On
questions
such
as
8
and
9
the

students
were
asked
to
use
or
identify
the
word
factor.
All
of
the
students
got
9
correctly
but

not
everyone
got
question
8
correctly.
This
showed
that
the
exam
questions
were
not
a
matter

of
testing
their
knowledge
because
they
knew
what
a
factor
was
but
rather
testing
whether
or

not
they
understood
the
wording
of
the
question.
Given,
that
assessments
are
to
test

knowledge
base
I
would
like
to
create
an
assessment
that
is
a
platform
to
do
so.

Post-assessment
Results

According
to
the
data
seen
in
figure
6
the
mean
of
the
scores
is
80.35%,
the
range
is
6.5

or
72.22%,
and
the
median
is
5.5
or
61.11%.

Data
Analysis:

The
post
assessment
shows
that
the
students
understood
standards

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3,
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.B.5,
and

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.C.7
but
still
need
a
significant
amount
of
work
learning
standard

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4.
Based
on
each
assessment
question
the
students
still
need
to

learn
how
certain
concepts
can
mean
the
same
things
but
look
different.
For
example
all
of
the

students
knew
that
in
the
commutative
property
of
multiplication
you
switch
the
factors
and

get
the
same
product,
however
when
the
students
were
asked
to
apply
this
knowledge
by

identify
the
factors
and
the
product
not
all
of
them
circled
the
correct
answers.
This
showed

that
the
students
need
more
time
learning
how
to
apply
their
knowledge
and
identify
it
in

different
situations.

The
data
demonstrates
that
students
still
need
a
lot
of
help
transitioning
from

manipulatives
and
pictures
to
the
memorization
of
the
multiplication
facts.
For
example
all
of

the
students
correctly
answered
question
number
three
which
asks
them
to
draw
an
array

model
but
only
one
student
got
questions
one
and
two
correctly
which
call
for
the
answers
to

multiplication
problems.
This
showed
that
they
understand
the
foundation
upon
which

multiplication
comes
from
but
cannot
apply
it
to
equations.
I
believe
these
results
are
due
to
a

lack
of
time
and
repetition
spent
on
learning
the
multiplication
facts.

Figure
4

4

3

Students Correct

2

1

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Item
Number

Pre
Post

Figure
5

12

10

8

Items

0

3.OA.A.3 3.OA.A.4 3.OA.B.5
3.OA.C.7

Standards

Figure
6

9

5

Scores

Student

Pre Post

Reflection
of
results:

Based
on
the
results
of
this
data
I
would
spend
slightly
less
time
on
teaching
the
array

model
and
commutative
property
and
spend
more
time
on
the
memorization
of
multiplication

facts.
By
spending
a
little
less
time
on
the
foundational
skills
and
more
on
the
repetition
of
the

multiplication
problems
we
would
have
been
able
to
help
the
students
transition
to
the

application
of
the
concepts
being
taught
and
they
would
have
more
likely
been
closer
to
where

their
peers
are
at
in
this
unit.
From
this
analysis
I
learned
that
our
units
must
constantly
be

ready
to
be
modified
and
improved
based
on
the
needs
of
our
students
and
what
the
data

shows.
When
we
fail
to
make
these
changes
as
necessary
we
fail
to
teach
to
the
needs
of
our

students.
By
using
both
the
pre
and
post
assessment
data
I
was
better
able
to
understand
what

worked
and
what
did
not
work
as
far
as
what
methods
I
used
in
teaching
my
students.
At
times

they
learned
faster
or
slower
than
I
expected,
which
I
would
not
have
known
had
I
not
assessed

the
data.
By
using
data
and
not
feeling
alone
I
am
better
able
to
understand
my
students
more

clearly
and
learn
to
better
cater
to
their
needs.
For
example
I
thought
they
would
have
easily

been
able
to
translate
the
vocabulary
we
used
to
an
actual
multiplication
problem
and
identify

its
parts
when
in
reality
they
only
understood
the
words
I
was
saying
and
not
the
application.

Overall
reflection:

The
unit
honed
in
on
multiplication,
more
specifically
the
Commutative
Property
of

Multiplication
and
representing
multiplication
and
division
as
specified
in
standard

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4.
The
intention
of
our
unit
was
to
build
our
students

foundational
understanding
of
multiplication
by
using
manipulatives
to
demonstrate
that

multiplication
is
adding
a
group
of
numbers
together
a
given
number
of
times,
essentially

repeated
addition.
We
later
identified
the
terms
used
when
learning
multiplication
such
as

factors,
and
products.
As
the
last
part
of
our
multiplication
unit
we
illustrated
the
commutative

property
so
that
the
students
would
know
that
switching
the
order
of
the
factors
will
still
give

you
the
same
product.

I
believe
that
much
of
our
students
growth
was
achieved
by
asking
informal
assessment

questions
during
instruction
and
then,
in
turn,
directing
our
teaching
based
on
those
questions.

Having
smaller
groups
and
sufficient
time,
we
were
able
to
make
sure
that
students
understood

the
material
being
presented.
Given
that
our
students
were
progressing
more
slowly
than
their

peers
I
believe
that
they
needed
explicit
instruction
that
could
only
be
given
in
a
smaller
group.

I
believe
there
was
a
lack
of
growth
with
certain
standards
because
there
was
less
time
spent

on
those
standards.
For
example
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4
was
taught
in
our
first
lesson

plan.
Our
intent
was
to
spend
30
our
of
our
45
minute
lesson
on
that
standard
but
we
spent

more
than
35
minutes
on
teaching
the
array
model
and
the
last
few
minutes
on
the
common

core
standard.

From
our
unit
I
learned
that
instruction
must
be
thoroughly
prepared
for.
By
this
I
mean

to
refer
to
the
importance
of
understanding
a
topic
both
deeply
and
on
a
surface
level.
When

we
are
prepared
by
first
personally
understanding
a
topic
we
will
then
have
the
ability
to
allow

the
lesson
to
go
where
it
needs
to
go
in
order
to
fulfill
the
academic
needs
of
our
students.
For

example
if
we
prepare
a
lesson
and
have
a
set
expectation
of
how
the
lesson
will
go,
and
only

stick
to
that
expectation
we
will
more
often
than
not
overlook
the
role
we
have
to
instruct

based
on
students
needs.

Based
on
my
teaching,
I
found
I
was
challenged
in
my
attempt
to
balance
the
various

needs
of
students
as
well
as
incorporating
the
input
of
others
into
my
teaching.
My
students

were
in
various
places
and
have
different
needs
as
far
as
their
learning
styles
and
where
they

are
at
academically.
In
teaching
as
a
profession
there
are
a
large
number
of
those
in
our
sphere

of
influence.
This
often
means
that
we
have
to
coordinate
with
other
teachers,
parents,
and

educators
to
make
sure
that
things
are
being
taught
in
the
classroom
that
will
benefit
the

student.
The
experience
of
teaching
this
unit
was
a
great
practice
run
for
my
senior
practicum.

I
worked
with
a
partner
who
has
completely
different
expectations
of
how
a
lesson
should
be

taught.
As
a
result,
we
had
to
make
changes
to
accommodate
each
other
in
certain
aspects
of

the
lessons.
This
skill
will
enable
me
to
be
a
better
team
member
in
both
my
practicum
and

future
career.
In
addition
to
those
specific
struggles
I
had
in
my
teaching
experience
something

positive
became
clear.
I
learned
through
teaching
was
that
I
can
teach
and
be
successful
if
I

continue
to
be
open
to
things
I
need
to
improve.
I
was
able
to
experience
the
things
I
have
to

offer
to
the
world
of
education
in
real
time
and
felt
rejuvenated
to
carry
on
in
my
quest
to

become
a
teacher.
This
positive
experience
will
help
me
to
be
more
confident
moving
on
to
my

senior
practicum
and
student
teaching
because
I
know
that
through
humility
I
can
become
the

best
teacher
I
can.

Through
this
semester
I
have
learned
several
things
about
myself
as
a
teacher
and

person.
As
a
teacher
I
have
learned
that
in
order
to
be
a
true
educator
I
cannot
just
worry
about

my
own
success
but
also
the
success
of
my
peers
and
the
families
I
come
in
contact
with.
As
a

teacher
it
is
my
responsibility
to
educate
peers
and
families
about
best
practices
so
that

together
we
can
make
positive
changes
happen.
As
a
person
I
have
learned
that
sometimes

success
does
not
always
mean
being
the
best
but
rather
possessing
the
ability
to
wade
through

hard
experiences
and
specifically
hard
classes
while
at
the
same
time
helping
others
along
their

path.
I
previously
viewed
success
as
something
flashy
and
I
only
considered
it
success
if

others
publicly
acknowledge
it
as
such.
Through
my
participation
in
this
course
specifically
I

learned
that
success
can
sometimes
mean
hunkering
down
during
the
hard
times
when
others

give
up;
in
short,
doing
your
best
even
when
you
find
yourself
way
out
of
your
comfort
zone.

- te 407 assessment assignmentCargado porapi-333030790
- pbl intervention overviewCargado porapi-268936426
- Educational Measurement Assessment and EvaluationCargado porJoey Bojo Tromes Bolinas
- [National Council of Teachers of Mathematics] Jour(BookFi.org)Cargado porMundzir Ahmad
- unit over view with innovationCargado porVu Nguyen
- 2018 midyear exam task cover sheetCargado porapi-341123529
- smart goals worksheet 2Cargado porapi-329889139
- Hastuti_HandayaniCargado porTiyasNurfia
- Personalized LearningCargado porMohamad Fayez Albeal
- practicum topics - lesson 1Cargado porapi-332337086
- written reflection 1Cargado porapi-353369365
- Assessment.docxCargado porEstetis Tones
- 9781107468917_Intro_001.pdfCargado porJorge Salas
- TSL3123 Language AssessmentCargado pormarvinsmith

- 20140929 t 18111602820926369 bCargado porBureido
- Ramos Actividad 1.1 r.a.1.1Cargado porJoseph Lancaster
- AD2000_HP0_2013ECargado porgogsic
- Rúbrica Trabajo EstadisticaCargado porMariela Tiburcio Viveros
- DEBATE.pdfCargado porRosa Palacios Silupú
- Componente Técnico_V3Cargado porNancy C.g
- Unidad 1. Bioetica y Sustentabilidad ActividadesCargado porNajjum Najjüm Méndevaz
- christopher kellys resumeCargado porapi-340610944
- OficioPreceptorF2Cargado porAna González
- deg15 csy3 mutantsCargado porapi-364439157
- 04 SEAMEO 7 Priority Areas Implementation by CentresCargado porree.jall
- Modelo Bom de CurriculumCargado porAbrão Junior
- S22 - Dimensión Social ComunitariaCargado porNathaly Meza Lozano
- TALLER Tipos de comunicacion.pptxCargado porGigio PV
- Scientists Move Closer to Understanding Schizophrenia’s Cause - The New York TimesCargado porEveraldo Skrock
- ORIENTACIONES PEDAGÓGICAS PARA EL GRADO DE TRANSICIÓNCargado porClaudia Patricia Corrales Vergara
- 2 MSSC Endpoint Protection OverviewCargado porDSunte Wilson
- Psych Competency Trainees GuideCargado porimperiallight
- ATS Library AccreditationCargado porrmartelAST
- DLL MIL 2nd Quarter Week2Cargado porJulius Balonsong Baldelovar
- Caso PracticoCargado porgogoyubarismooth
- 267360726-Informe-Fonoaudiologico-TEL.docxCargado porPedemonte Ramirez Maria
- Gestión Institucional y Su Relación Con La Calidad Del ServicioCargado pordjfulanito
- Writing Register Formal InformalCargado porGreenic525
- Ensayo 1Cargado porJosé Pestana
- EDUCACIÓN A PACIENTESCargado porCarlos Martin Yepez Pedroza
- 4458Cargado porGanah Mohamed
- Procedure for Opting for the Modified TrainingCargado porSabyasachi Kar
- AWS_Elastic Load BalancingCargado porvamsi2903
- 2daSesForCTEPreescolar2017-18MEEPCargado porHernando Piña Lozano