Running Head: PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA

Practitioner Inquiry Agenda

Nermin H. Fialkowski

National University

Master of Science- Advanced Teaching Practices

Spring 2019
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 2

Practitioner Inquiry Journal Questions:

Starting Points Activity

Brainstorming

I wonder about:

• What activities students find engaging Rate 3, 2, or 1

2
I wish I could learn more about:

• What makes an assessment effective Rate 3, 2, or 1

1
• Student motivation (or lack thereof) for not producing work Rate 3, 2, or 1
1
I wish my student(s) could …?

• Put in time and effort into completing their homework Rate 3, 2, or 1

1
• Actively participate in group work Rate 3, 2, or 1
2

Narrowing Your Focus

Areas of Interest Ranked Order

1
I wish I could learn more about: What makes an assessment
effective
2
I wish I could learn more about: Student motivation (or lack
thereof) for not producing work
3
I wish my students could: Put in time and effort into completing
their homework accurately
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 3

Developing Initial Question

Develop an Initial Question

During this section, you will move your ‘highest’ topic of interest identified during the
‘Starting Points’ activity into an initial question. This question will guide your upcoming
review of the literature.

Instructions
1. In the space below, write your ‘highest’ topic/area of interest.
I wish I could learn more about: What makes an assessment effective

2. In the next space, identify the ‘content’ associated with your interest area.
Assessment

3. In the third space below, experiment by putting your content into a question format. To
do so, use each of the two question stems to put your content.

• What are (add your content)?

What are the elements of an effective assessment?

• How can (add your content)?

How can I create effective assessments?

4. Examine each of your two drafted questions. Which question makes the most sense to
you? Write that initial question in the fourth space, below.

Now, the 4 Spaces Below

1) Highest Interest/Topic.
I wish I could learn more about: What makes an assessment effective

2) Highest Interest/Topic’s Content.

Assessment

3) Use one of the 2 question stems: a) What are (content)? Or b) How can (content)?
What are the elements of an effective assessment?

4) Write your initial question, here.

What are the elements of an effective assessment?
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 4

Evaluating Your Initial Question

Considering your identified topic’s question, take a few moments to answer three evaluative
questions, below. The questions are to help you determine the appropriateness of your
question.
Instructions
1. For each question located below, provide a “yes’ or ‘no’ answer.
2. If you answer "NO" to any of the three questions, then you will need to revise your
question so you can answer "YES" to all three questions.
If you answer "YES" to all three questions, then you are ready to move forward and begin
your review of the educational literature.
• Are you satisfied with your question? Yes or No

Yes
• Does the question go beyond the “Yes/No” dimension? Yes or No

Yes
• Are you still VERY interested in studying your question’s Yes or No
topical area?
Yes
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 5

Developing Initial Question

Develop an Initial Question

During this section, you will move your ‘highest’ topic of interest identified during the
‘Starting Points’ activity into an initial question. This question will guide your upcoming
review of the literature.

Instructions
1. In the space below, write your ‘highest’ topic/area of interest.
I wonder about: What influences students to become active learners

2. In the next space, identify the ‘content’ associated with your interest area.
Instruction

3. In the third space below, experiment by putting your content into a question format. To
do so, use each of the two question stems to put your content.

• What are (add your content)?

What are the instructional strategies used to foster active learning?

• How can (add your content)?

How can I implement instructional strategies to engage students in active
learning?

4. Examine each of your two drafted questions. Which question makes the most sense to
you? Write that initial question in the fourth space, below.

Now, the 4 Spaces Below

1) Highest Interest/Topic.
I wonder about: What influences students to become active learners

2) Highest Interest/Topic’s Content.

Instruction

3) Use one of the 2 question stems: a) What are (content)? Or b) How can (content)?
What are the instructional strategies used to foster active learning?

4) Write your initial question, here.

What are the instructional strategies used to foster active learning?
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 6

Evaluating Your Initial Question

Considering your identified topic’s question, take a few moments to answer three
evaluative questions, below. The questions are to help you determine the
appropriateness of your question.
Instructions
1. For each question located below, provide a “yes’ or ‘no’ answer.
2. If you answer "NO" to any of the three questions, then you will need to revise your
question so you can answer "YES" to all three questions.
If you answer "YES" to all three questions, then you are ready to move forward and begin
your review of the educational literature.
• Are you satisfied with your question? Yes or No

Yes
• Does the question go beyond the “Yes/No” dimension? Yes or No

Yes
• Are you still VERY interested in studying your question’s Yes or No
topical area?
Yes

If you answered ‘Yes’ to all three evaluative questions,

then you are ready to move forward to the final ‘Explore’ area called
Reviewing the Educational Literature.

Initial Questions

Instructional Literacy Specialization:

What are the instructional strategies used to foster active learning?

Assessment Literacy Specialization:

What are the elements of an effective assessment?
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 7

Journal Articles
Instruction
Title: Information Literacy in the Active Learning Classroom

Reflection:

Informational Literacy deals with how learners interact with new information

(knowledge). The book, Information Literacy in the Active Learning Classroom, identifies three

major themes of how teachers have their students engage with information in an active learning

environment: 1) information skills students should know, 2) part of the process (of learning), 3)

empowered by disciplinary information practices. Incorporating active learning approaches in

the classroom is beneficial to student learning and engagement in various disciplines. “Highly

effective educational practices tend to be active in nature and typically involve using information

in specific ways” (Maybee, Doan, & Flierl, 2016). I appreciated a valid point brought up in the

book, “are teachers integrating these technologies effectively for teaching and learning

processes?” (Maybee, Doan, & Flierl, 2016). Just because technology is included in the lesson,

it does not mean that students are actively engaged in the learning process.

Title: Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning

Reflection:

Today’s students are 21st Century learners. Education in the 21st Century must be active,

engaging, and customized to fit the needs of the individual learner. Twenty-first Century skills

are categorized by the Three C’s (communication, collaboration, and creativity). Handbook of

Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning found four categories for

21st Century skills: 1) ways of thinking, 2) ways of working, 3) tools for working, 4) skills for

living in the world. The emphasis of active learning is any instructional method that engages
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 8

students in the learning process. Active learning requires students to do meaningful learning

activities and think about what they are doing. Receiving information does not guarantee

learning. Learning is the transfer of knowledge and information; students are to think and learn

beyond remembering and stating facts.

This article is relevant to my Initial Question of “What are the instructional strategies

used to foster active learning?” Integrating 21st Century skills and technology into the classroom

forces students to be engaged and active in the material. The book continues to give various

examples of how to incorporate technology as a way to transform student thinking, including the

use of Apps and Project-Based Learning.

Title: Active Learning in Japan and Europe

Reflection:

As noted in the title “Active Learning in Japan and Europe” the article references that the

active learning model is new to schools in Japan. Although the focus is in Japan and Europe, the

information is still highly relevant to my initial question of “what are the instructional strategies

used to foster active learning?” Active learning is a recently introduced teaching methodology in

Japan as an alternative to the traditional, "passive" learning. “Passive” learning can be

categorized as rote memorization and teacher-centered classroom. Active learning is defined as

“the process of having students engage in some activity that forces them to reflect upon ideas and

how they are using those ideas. Requiring students to regularly assess their own degree of

understanding and skill at handling concepts or problems in a particular discipline” (Smith,

2018). Active learning is student-centered, collaborative, participative, and self-reflective.

UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 9

Among the recognized benefits of active learning there is increased motivation, improved deep

understanding, enhanced retention, and development of critical thinking skills.

Title: Active Learning in the Math Classroom

Reflection:

“Active Learning in the Math Classroom” supports my Initial Question of “what are the

instructional strategies used to foster active learning?” The use of technology in the classroom

where students produce work and demonstrate their knowledge is an effective way to engage in

active learning. Active learning is to be considered the opposite of passive listening. Some

examples of active learning are students taking ownership of their learning and the teacher

becoming a facilitator. Through the use of technology, a “flipped” classroom environment, and

project based learning, students are reframing their questions from “I don’t get it” to “I’m

confused at this part of the problem.” Through authenticity students develop and apply new

knowledge to real world problems. Through the use of technology, student thinking is made

visible and it is a way for students to verbalize their learning. This article encourages the use of

personalized learning for students. This refers to watching self-paced videos on various topics

with the use of frequent check-ins, to monitor/assess learning. As stated by Timothy Marum in

“Active Learning in the Math Classroom,” “when students are offered interest-based choices,

given self-paced boundaries to demonstrate mastery, and are using multiple modalities of

creating new knowledge, this empowerment naturally begets engagement.”

UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 10

Title: Increasing Math Success with Differentiated Instruction

Reflection:

The intent of this study was to address the integration of differentiated instruction in the

mathematics classroom, and the design and implementation of research-based instructional

strategies to improve student achievement in mathematics. The study analyzed the achievement

and comprehension of mathematical fundamentals among 8th grade general education students

as differentiated instructional strategies were used during the delivery of instruction. The

guiding question for this study was “Does differentiated instruction have a positive effect on 8th

grade mathematics achievement?”

The results from this study demonstrated that differentiated instruction does have an

effect on mathematical achievement for 8th grade students (improvement did occur) in Georgia;

however, the effect is almost equal to that of traditional instruction. This means that the 8th grade

students who receive differentiated instruction in their mathematics class may score higher on

assessments but may also score higher through the use of traditional instruction. There was not a

statistically significant difference in mathematical achievement between students taught

traditionally in a whole-class environment and those taught through differentiated instruction.

However, there was a significant difference in the increase of scores from pre to post-tests with

the 8th grade students. This difference was between traditional and differentiated instruction

amongst middle school students.

Although there was an increase in test scores in the class receiving differentiated

instruction, there was a greater increase in test scores in the class receiving traditional

instruction. None-the-less, differentiated instruction still has a positive impact on 8th grade

mathematics achievement. In terms of my Initial Question “What are the instructional strategies
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 11

used to foster active learning?” differentiated instruction is one way to fosters active learning

from students, because the learning is tailored to their educational wants and needs, and when

students needs are met, they are more motivated to do work.

Title: Differentiated Instruction: An Exploratory Study in a Secondary Mathematics Classroom

Reflection:

This study explored the different approaches of teaching in a differentiated instruction

classroom. The research was conducted at a college preparatory high school, with an emphasis

on using various approaches to differentiate instruction in order to enhance students’

comprehension of Advanced Algebra II. The purpose of the study was to explore whether

students’ performance outcomes in mathematics relate to their experience in a differentiated

instruction classroom.

The majority of participants provided positive feedback to many aspects of a

differentiated instruction classroom. Some of these aspects included: classroom structure,

challenging material, group problem solving, individual attention, lectures, motivation, lack of

peer pressure, teaching style, tiered groups, and working at their own pace. Students were able

to acclimate and embrace changes enthusiastically and swiftly.

In the findings of Ariss, et al. (2017).

The qualitative data in this study supported the quantitative data findings and

illustrated various possibilities for teachers to implement differentiated

instructional strategies in their classrooms. The qualitative data analysis revealed

different components of differentiated instruction classrooms and their effects on

both: the students and the teacher…Data was skewed to the left, which indicates

that the majority of students performed above average. Students from the bottom
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 12

two quartiles, where the D and C averages were dominating, described their

involvement in the differentiated instruction classroom as a positive experience

(p.142).

The quantitative data analysis demonstrated a significant boost of student achievement,

provided differentiated instruction. The analysis revealed that 70% of participants scored in the

A range, 13% in the B range, another 13% in the C range, and 3%, scored in the D range. As

part of the differentiated instruction, students were provided with: choice, which allowed for

interactive learning, challenging tasks at various levels, productive small group work, individual

work time. All which proved to be successful approaches to teaching and learning. All of these

aspects of differentiated instruction are strategies used to foster active learning.

Title: The Effect of the Differentiated Teaching Approach in the Algebraic Learning Field on

Students’ Academic Achievements

Reflection:

The intent of this study was to determine the effects of differentiated teaching approaches

presented during mathematics lessons of algebra on students’ academic success. The questions

asked by the researcher were: 1- Is there a significant difference between the last test points on

the algebra success test of an experiment group that was taught with differentiated teaching

approaches and a control group that was taught with present teaching approaches when the

analysis controls for pretest points? 2- Is there a significant difference between the test points on

the persistency algebra success test of an experiment group that was taught with differentiated

teaching approaches and a control group that was taught with present teaching approaches when

the analysis controls for pretest points? 3- What are the opinions of the students in the
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 13

experiment group that was taught with differentiated teaching approaches about this teaching

approach?

The purpose of this study was to understand and determine the effects of differentiated

teaching approaches on students’ academic success during a 6th grade mathematics lesson in

algebra. The findings demonstrated that a differentiated teaching approach did increased

students’ success. Additionally, during this time, students showed positive cognitive and

affective developments. The research determined that students in the experiment group who had

been taught with a differentiated teaching approach, had higher scores on their most recent test

than students in the control group.

Assessment

Title: Effective Instruction Begins with Purposeful Assessments (Speaking to Administrators and

Reading Specialists)

Reflection:

“Effective Instruction Begins with Purposeful Assessments” differentiates between

assessment and evaluation. Assessment is both diagnostic and formative. Evaluation is a

summation and is used upon completion of instruction; it is the final analysis of instruction and

assessment. The article also provides three recommendations to change the approach of

assessment: 1) make assessments useful for students and teachers, 2) follow corrective

instruction, 3) more than one opportunity to demonstrate success.

This article is relevant to my Initial Question “what are the elements of an effective

assessment?” It gives an outline to how maximize effectiveness of assessments by: creating time

frames to assess, establish vertical teams, talk about assessments with colleagues, gather baseline
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 14

data, work with data, and plan the next steps. It also details the reciprocal relationship between

curriculum, assessment, and instruction.

Title: Lesson Learned: What International Assessments Tell Us About Math Achievement

Reflection:

There are two international assessments that are used to compare various nations in their

competency of mathematics and science, Trends in International Math and Science Study

(TIMSS) and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). TIMSS focuses on the

extent to which students have mastered mathematics and science as they appear in school

curriculum, while PISA focuses on the ability to use knowledge and skills to meet real-life

challenges. Based off TIMSS results, Ina Mullis and Mick Martin identify three main points in

Lesson Learned: What International Assessments Tell Us About Math Achievement: 1) math

achievement varies broadly among nations, 2) high-scoring nations succeed with virtually all of

their students, 3) high-scoring nations tend to be wealthier.

Unfortunately, these finding are not too relevant to my Initial Question “what are the

elements of an effective assessment?” Most of the findings are comparing data and analyzing

results between nations, but it does provide insight and guidance to those results. For example,

the book address the issue of curriculum content standards. It notes “that for content standards

‘to be coherent’ they must evolve from particulars to deeper structure” (Loveless, 2007). In

addition, “if content standards reflect the structure of a discipline. Then the depth of those

standards should increase as students move across the grades” (Loveless, 2007).
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 15

Title: Measuring the Alignment of High School and Community College Math Assessment

Reflection:

As stated in “Measuring the Alignment of High School and Community College Math

Assessment” more than 60% of all community college students in California are placed into

remedial classes. This high rate of remediation suggests that there is a widespread lack of

college preparation among recent high school graduates. There is evidence from high school

standardized tests that support this claim (California Department of Education, 2008). Although

students are underperforming in standardized tests, it does not mean they are not successful in

their high school career. Students are still meeting the minimum course requirements for

university admission, but are placed into remedial classes. At the core of this epidemic is a

misalignment between the high schools’ California Standards Test (CSTs) and the California

Community College (CCC) placement test.

California Standards Test has now been replaced by Smarter Balanced Assessment

Consortium (SBAC) as California’s Standardized Test. Although the high school standardized

test has changed since this publication, I believe the findings are still very relevant, especially in

my own school. Data from my school (Southwest High School, San Diego) suggests a large

discrepancy between students meeting college/university admission and their SBAC scores.

Looking at the 2017-2018 school year, 70% of our students meet the A-G requirements, but only

11% met or exceeded the SBAC Mathematics Standards.

Even though this article does not directly answer my Initial Question of “what are the

elements of an effective assessment?” it does provide me with information about the

misalignment from the CSTs and CCC which is integers and rationals, trigonometry, and
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 16

graphing. This information provides me with insight about what material needs to be covered in

my assessments so that students are best prepared for higher education.

Title: Equity of Literacy-Based Math Performance Assessments for English Language Learners

Reflection:

“Equity of Literacy-Based Math Performance Assessments for English Language

Learners” looks at math achievement between English Language Learners (ELLs) and Fully

English Proficient (FEP) students on a Literacy-Based Performance Assessment (LBPA). With

the introduction of Common Core State Standards, students are asked to read multi-level

questions and explain how they solve math problems in writing. Unfortunately, this places ELLs

at a disadvantage given their lack of literacy skills in English. Math is heavy with vocabulary

and ELLs have a hard time picking it up since it is not integrated into their daily language

setting. What really stood out to me in this article was the mention that ELLs are filtering a third

language when they are in math class. “First, ELL students must filter their math knowledge-a

language all its own-through a second language, English. So, in this case, math becomes the

‘third’ language. Students face an extra challenge, then, as they attempt to learn cognitively

demanding, highly abstract mathematical concepts while they are still learning English” (Chamot

& O'Malley, 1994). English Language Learner performance is often misunderstood, their poor

performance in problem-solving is often a factor of their English proficiency, and not their

mathematical knowledge.

This article really resonated me since I have many ELLs in my classroom. It reminded

me that in order to create effective assessments that monitors students’ learning, I must first have

effective instruction. My effective instruction must help build all students’ ability to
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 17

comprehend word problems and problem-solving situations. In addition to providing extra

support to ELLs in developing their literacy skills so that they can comprehend and understand

the language of word problems.

Title: Gender Differences in Large-Scale Math Assessments: PISA Trend 2000 and 2003

Reflection:

As noted by the title, “Gender Differences in Large-Scale Math Assessments: PISA

Trend 2000 and 2003” this article is about the discrepancy amongst gender in large-scale math

assessments, such as SAT, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and Trends in

Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). The results from Program for International Student

Assessment (PISA) in the U.S. during 2000 and 2003 showed that male students had the

advantage. Male students dominated in multiple choice questions and in the domain of space

and shape items (Geometry), but female students had the advantage when it comes to Algebra.

The article notes that there is no compelling evidence to state that the gender gap in mathematics

achievement will end in the near future. Research shows that there are two categories to

consider when looking at math gender differences, reasons from the student side, and reasons

from the assessment side. “Two main item-related factors have been identified to influence the

pattern and magnitude of gender differences: (1) the different cognitive domains measured by the

math tests and (2) the item types employed to elicit information from students” (Liu & Wilson,

2009).

This article peaked my interest in a subcategory of assessment. My Initial Question is

about effective assessment, and I believe that for an assessment to be effective, there should be

no gender bias. I am now curious to analyze my student data on assessment and see if it lines up
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 18

with this research.

Title: The Formative Assessment Action Plan

Reflection:

Frey and Fisher (2011) describe the Gradual Release of Responsibility as an instructional

framework as a stepping stone for building a sound assessment. The Gradual Release of

Responsibility includes: establishing purpose, teacher modeling, guided instruction, productive

group work, and independent tasks. Establishing purpose is the first crucial step in assessment

and instruction. Establishing a lesson’s purpose “lays out the content of what will be learned, the

learner’s role in what will accomplished, and the expectations for the interaction” (Frey &

Fisher, 2011, p.17). Establishing a clear purpose holds students accountable. It lets them know

what they will be learning, and how they will be participating in the learning. Ultimately,

“establishing purpose facilities the process of moving from initial learning to transfer of

learning” (Frey & Fisher, 2011, p.19). And the transfer of learning is where the learning takes

place.

Frey and Fisher (2011) also describe in detail various forms of feedback, levels, types and

forms. “The act of providing feedback needs to be approaches as purposefully as other aspects

of instruction” (Frey & Fisher, 2011, p. 64). Not all feedback is necessary effective; therefore,

feedback needs to be carefully thought out and executed. In regard to formative assessments,

Frey and Fisher (2011) introduce a system that provides teachers way to take action on students’

performance data. “This system includes feed-up, feedback, feed-forward, such that students

understand a lesson’s purpose and goal, are given information about their success and needs, and

experience high-quality instruction that closes the gap between what they know and can do and
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 19

what is expected of them” (Frey & Fisher, 2011, p. 12). These three forms of feedback address

the learning cycle of: 1- Where is the learner? (feed-up) 2- Where is the learner going?

(feedback) 3- How can the learner get there? (feed-forward). During the feed-up process,

students understand the purpose of the task, including how they will be assessed. For the

feedback stage, students need to be provided with descriptive and specific feedback that caters to

their successes and needs. And lastly, the feed-forward stage is the most vital for assessment.

Feeding-forward acts upon the feedback from the stage. Feedback would be meaningless, if not

acted upon. It is what is used to facilitate student achievement.

This book actually addresses both my Initial Questions about instruction (active

learners/motivation) and assessment (creating effective assessments). One first needs a strong

instructional framework, before building a sound assessment.

Title: Why Standardized Test Don’t Measure Educational Quality

Reflection:

Regardless of the type of assessment, formative or summative, assessment results are not

fully indicative of teaching and/or student ability. Assessment results do not fully reflect a

student as a whole. Many additional external factors can affect a student’s score that are not

truly reflective of their abilities and skills. Almost all assessments lack an emotional component

that consider the student as a whole. Additionally, assessment results are also not fully

indicative of a teacher’s ability, or educational quality. James Popham (1999) lists three

significant reasons as to the invalidity of associating educational quality to standardized

achievement test scores: test-mismatch (what is taught locally versus what is tested), elimination

of important test questions (meaningful comparisons among students are only from a small
UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 20

collection of items), and confounded causation (which accounts for what's taught in school,

students’ native intellectual ability, and students’ out-of-school learning).

Although this resource does not address the components of creating an effective

assessment, it is reassuring to know that assessment results do not fully reflect a student as a

whole. There are many additional external factors of a student’s score that are not truly

reflective of their abilities and skills.

Title: Understanding Formative Assessment: Insights from Learning Theory and Measurement

Theory

Reflection:

Summative assessments, such as high-stakes exams, dominate the education system as

the main source for accounting and monitoring individuals who meet grade-level standards.

High-stakes exams identify students who lack the knowledge and skills for their grade level but

does not identify as to why they are not proficient. This misalignment happens because high-

stakes exams are not linked closely enough to classroom instruction and curriculum. What the

educational system needs is an assessment system that yields useful information for a variety of

educational purposes. These educational purposes include the ability to shape ongoing

instruction in classroom and for the state to include accountability decisions. Additionally, this

assessment system needs to be coherent in which levels align with same learning goals across

classrooms and state. The goal is for this assessment system is to produce relevant information

about student learning over time.

UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 21

Trumbull and Lash (2013) identify the need and use of formative assessment to: 1- judge

the state of student knowledge and understanding; 2- identity the demands of a learning task; 3-

judge student work against a standard; 4- grasp and set learning goals; 5- select and engage in

strategies to keep student learning moving forward. These formative assessments are to be used

to make an inference about students’ knowledge. These inferences include, reliability, validity,

and fairness. With these formative assessments, teachers can adjust their instruction over time to

counter any test discrepancies. Teachers can also examine assessment to ensure that it does not

preclude or reduce the opportunity for any student to participate in the task and demonstrate their

knowledge, skills, and abilities.

This resource describes the importance of using formative assessment in the classroom as

a way to better assess students and their knowledge and abilities, over the use of high-stakes

exams. Specifically, because high-stakes exams do not identify why students are not proficient,

simplify that they lack the knowledge and skills for their grade level. With the use of formative

assessment in the classroom, there is a strong link classroom instruction and curriculum,

something high-stakes exams do not account for.

UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 22

References

Ariss, L., Chiarelott, Leigh, Johanning, Debra, Stewart, Victoria, & Teclehaimanot, Berhane.

(2017). Differentiated Instruction: An Exploratory Study in a Secondary Mathematics

Classroom. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Bal, A.P. (2016). The Effect of the Differentiated Teaching Approach in the Algebraic Learning

Field on Students' Academic Achievements. Eurasian Journal of Educational

Research, (63), 185-204.

Brown, Clara Lee. (2005). Equity of Literacy-Based Math Performance Assessments for English

Language Learners. Bilingual Research Journal,29(2), 337-363.

Burr, M., McClure, Robert, Broide, Donna, & Brown, Michelle. (2010). Increasing math success

with differentiated instruction. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Cobb, Charlene. (2003). Effective instruction begins with purposeful assessments. (Speaking to

Administrators and Reading Specialists). The Reading Teacher, 57(4), 386-388.

Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2011). The Formative Assessment Action Plan: Practice Steps to More

Successful Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision &

Curriculum Development.

Keengwe, J. (2015). Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active

Learning. (Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design).

Liu, Ou Lydia, & Wilson, Mark. (2009). Gender Differences in Large-Scale Math Assessments:

PISA Trend 2000 and 2003. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(2), 164-184.

Loveless, T., TIMSS International Study Center, & Ebrary, Inc. (2007). Lessons learned

[electronic resource] : What international assessments tell us about math achievement.

Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

UPDATED PRACTITIONER INQUIRY AGENDA 23

Maybee, C., Doan, T., & Flierl, M. (2016). Information Literacy in the Active Learning

Classroom. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 705-711.

Popham, W.J. (1999). Why Standardized Test Don’t Measure Educational Quality.

Educational Leadership, 56(6), 8-15.

Shelton, A., & Brown, R. (2010). Measuring the Alignment of High School and Community

College Math Assessments. Journal of Applied Research in the Community

College, 18(1), 6-15.

Smith, T. (2018). Active Learning in the Math Classroom. Tech & Learning, 38(7), 26.

Trumbull, E., & Lash, A. (2013). Understanding Formative Assessment: Insights from Learning

Theory and Measurement Theory. San Franscisco: WestEd.

Waniek, I., & Nae, N. (2017). Active Learning in Japan and Europe. Euromentor Journal,

8(4), 82-97.