Ashley Reid
Assessments for Learning
Spring 2015
Field Experience
Task, Criteria, and Assessment Strategy
For my Field Experience, I chose a Power Grade Level Expectation
(PGLE) from my most recent math focus. For this PGLE, the students were
asked to compare two fractions with the same numerator or the same
denominator by reasoning about their size. They were also asked to record
the results of the comparisons with the symbols <, >, or =, and justify the
conclusions by using a visual fraction model. This PGLE was taught over the
course of 10 days in my 3rd grade classroom of 26 students. Math Workshop
is an hour each day. The first 10 minutes of Math Workshop consists of a
mini-lesson where I teach a simpler version of the task. After that, the
students have 30-40 minutes of investigation time to come up with their own
strategies or investigate with strategies that work best for them. The last
10-15 minutes are for share time. Share time is a great opportunity to help
students see how important looking back at their work is. They are able to
reflect on their own thinking and the thinking of others. During this time, I
call up students to share out effective strategies used during the given task.
To begin this PGLE, I looked at the focus assessment that was to be
given at the end. The district provides the focus assessment, so that piece
was already created. From the post assessment, I created a pre-assessment
and then looked through the provided lessons to determine the order in
which to teach the lessons based on the task. I had previously taught
fractions earlier in the school year, so the class had some exposure, but this
was the first time where the students were asked to compare fractions and
justify their thinking by using a visual fraction model. They had the option to
use either an area model or a linear model to justify the conclusions. The
pre-assessment consisted of two fractions with different denominators. They
were asked to compare the two fractions using >, <, or = and use a visual
fraction model to explain their thinking.
Data Plan
To track the growth of the students, I decided to create graphs that
represented class progress as well as individual progress. For the classroom
data, I sorted their pre-assessments into three categories: little evidence of
task (0 points), some evidence of task (2 points), and strong evidence of task
(4 points). I also chose three students to track throughout this focus. These
three students are students who, in the past, have consistently been low,
middle, and high. The students who scored 0 on their pre-assessment
showed little evidence, the students who scored 2 points showed some
evidence, and the students who scored 4 points showed strong evidence.
The first graph I created was to show the class data for the pre-assessment.
Classroom
Pre-Assessment
Strong Evidence; 23%
Little Evidence; 46%
Some Evidence; 31%
The next graph is comparing the scores from each of the four
assessments on the three students that I chose to track during this field
experience. As one can see, the high student was consistently high
throughout this focus. The middle and low student did not score any points
on the pre-assessment, and the low student did not show any growth until
the third assessment.
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
High Student
Middle Student
Low Student
1.5
1
0.5
0
Pre-Assessment
Assessment 1
Assessment 2 Post-Assessment
This next graph shows the classroom data for the post-assessment.
There was significant growth between the pre-assessment and the postassessment data. Over 80% of the class is now showing strong evidence of
understanding the concept.
Classroom Post-Assessment
Little Evidence; 7%
Some Evidence; 8%
Strong Evidence; 85%
The final graph is just comparing the classroom pre-assessment results
to the classroom post-assessment results.
90
80
70
60
50
Pre-Assessment
40
Post-Assessment
30
20
10
0
Little Evidence
Some Evidence
Strong Evidence
Summarize and Interpret Data
From looking at the pre-assessment results, it was apparent that a
majority of my class showed little evidence of the task. Almost half of the
class (46%) struggled with comparing the fractions and representing their
thinking using a visual fraction model. By looking at their pre-assessments, I
could see that the first place I needed to start was with their understanding
of denominators. Many students showed they believed the fraction with the
larger denominator was the larger fraction. However, as we started getting
back into fractions, the students quickly picked up where we had left off from
earlier in the year and were able to activate and use their prior knowledge.
By using my pre-assessment data, I was able to see which students were
able to compare fractions, which students understood what a visual fraction
model was and how to show it, and which students needed the most
teaching. By creating instruction that targeted these skills they were
missing, the class grew from 23% showing strong evidence of understanding
to 85% showing strong evidence of understanding. This is the most growth
that I have seen on any focus assessment that I have given this year. I was
very happy with the overall results of the class.
When looking at each students growth, I noticed that the middle and
low student started out much lower than my high student. The middle and
low student both scored a 0 on the pre-assessment, while the high student
received all 4 points. The low student continued to struggle with assessment
1, while the middle student started to show understanding of the concept.
The high student scored consistently well on each assessment given. This
was not a surprise as this student consistently does well, but I was very
happy with the low students growth. This student has struggled all year and
rarely shows proficiency, so I was pleased with this students growth during
this focus.
One area where students are still fragile is with the visual fraction
model. Although they were able to show their model, this part of the focus is
where I noticed they struggled most. The next time I teach fractions, I am
going to use the area and linear model from the very beginning and not wait
until this focus to introduce the terms and what they are. Even though they
are not comparing fractions until the end of third grade, I think having been
exposed to these terms beforehand would have made this focus go more
smoothly.
Next Steps
Even though the low student did show a lot of growth, I plan on pulling
the several students who struggled into a small group to re-teach the
concept during the math intervention time. I plan on using more visuals
when working with these students and discuss their misconceptions. For
example, the low student was able to draw the visual fraction model, but
used two different sized wholes. That data tells me that this student is still
having difficulty understanding that the wholes must be the same size. For
this concept, I would use a real life example, such as two different sized
candy bars, and have a discussion with this student about how half of a fun
size candy bar is not the same as half of a king size candy bar.
For the students who met proficiency, I plan on challenging them by
having them explain their thinking instead of showing with a visual fraction
model. For example, I know that 2/6 is less than 2/4 because 2/4 is equal to
1/2 and 2/6 is equal to 1/3 and 1/3 is less than 1/2. This gets them thinking
about equivalencies, a concept done in a previous focus, and helps them
make connections between the two while being able to support their thinking
with an explanation.
