Está en la página 1de 23

# Lincoln

Portfolio
Hannah Burdick
SPED 424
November 21, 2016

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.

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

## Item Number Pre

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

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

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
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.

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

## Post Assessment Item Number

4
3
Students Correct
2
1
0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Item Number
Pre Post

Figure 5

## Post Assessment: Standards

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

## -1 Brinlee Taylor Tino Charly

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.