Better Math Explanations

Screen Shot 2018-11-16 at 7.53.46 PM.png

One of my primary classes just finished up a math pre-assessment.  One of the questions on this assessment asked students to explain their mathematical reasoning.  Specifically, they were given a prompt, a student example, and then asked to explain in their own words what happened.  Students had a lot of questions about this problem.  Since it was a pre-assessment, I basically kept quiet and asked them to persevere.  Some did, others didn’t.

A few students dropped their faces when they saw their pre-assessment results. Many, and I mean over half of the kids didn’t meet the expectations on the written response.  Instead of putting together sentences, the majority of students created number models and that was that.  Some students even wrote that the character was wrong and didn’t explain anything further.  I was a bit disappointed, but no worries though – this is a pre-assessment.  The actual assessment won’t happen for another couple weeks.

I noticed that I needed to look more closely at how to address the math writing issue.  I also needed to clarify the expectations for written responses.  This was new territory for kids.  Most students are able to tell me (with prodding) their thinking and how it relates to the problem solving process.  It’s a different story when it comes to writing it down.  In the next few week I want to ensure that students are explaining their mathematical thinking clearly and in a way that answers the question.

So this Wednesday students were asked to start looking for specific details in their writing.  We began by having the entire class analyze one math response from another “student” from a couple years ago (ok … maybe I created this).  Students went into teams and analyzed the exemplar and looked for key components in the response.  Students looked for an answer statement, math vocabulary and important numbers.  They then coded the response with circles, rectangles and underlining.  The student teams explained to the class what they thought qualified as an answer statement.  This was a great discussion as students came to a consensus to what qualifies as a statement that answers the question.  Students also discussed the numbers that were important and the math vocabulary that was used.

Later in the day students answered a similar prompt and then switched papers with a peer.  The other student coded the paper and then the pairs discussed what they wrote and why.

Screen Shot 2018-11-16 at 7.54.10 PM.png

The class will be meeting next week to review more examples.  Afterwards we plan on responding to a different math prompt and code our own writing.  I’m looking forward to seeing how this emphasis on mathematical writing transfers throughout the year.

 

Advertisements

More on Standards-Based Grading

Screen Shot 2018-11-04 at 2.10.37 PM.png

Last Friday was a teacher institute day.   I spent my time planning, working on report cards, and listening to a speaker in the afternoon.  The speaker spoke to all of the elementary teachers in the district.  The event ended up being in the cafetorium (that’s what we call the auditorium/cafeteria).  It’s a huge wide-open space that usually holds elementary and middle school lunches.  The speaker introduced himself and told everyone that he was there* to chat about standards-based grading/policies.  There’s been talk that the district will be moving towards standards-based grading at some point in the next few years.

The presenter went through questions related to why teachers grade students, why standards are used, and how inadequate a 100 scale is while emphasizing the need to use feedback instead.  I think most educators there were  aware that specific feedback is a more useful tool than points.  The presenter reaffirmed the audience’s beliefs and also  dolled out research by Paul Blake and Dylan Wiliam’s “Inside the Black Box” study.

After about an hour and half the presenter mentioned how he would introduce a  standards-based reporting model.  He also prefaced this saying that there’s not a perfect model.


4 – “Blows the expectations out of the water”

3– “Meets the expectations”

2– “Student needs a little help to meet the expectations”

1– “Student needs a lot of help to meet the expectations”


I’ve never had standards-based grading explained like this and it was refreshing.  I noticed a few teachers nodding and a few commenting about the simplicity behind the reasoning.  The presenter went through a number of submitted questions related to what happens when teachers have different opinions on what “blows the expectations out of the water.”  Questions also came up about how many standards to report for the report card.  There wasn’t exactly a right answer with this, but the presenter mentioned that students have “all of the year” to meet the standard.  There were questions about this.  Consistency with teachers’ expectations was also addressed and many teachers believed this would be a good use of PLC time.

in some schools that use standards-based grading, I’ve seen a number models where teachers use a percent scale and then convert that value to a 1-4.  I’m sure there are plenty of standards-based grading models out there and doubt there’s a fool-proof way to implement this new communication tool.

The good news is that I believe teachers are already using standard-based practices.  Some teachers are eliminating points and percentages on some of the assignments. They’re also moving towards a “Not Yet” or “Met” policy with tasks.  Report card grades tend to reflect unit assessments. I know of some classrooms that are already using classroom policies that reflect a standards-based model, while others don’t. Moving forward, I believe there’ll need to be support in developing consistency as districts move towards new reporting models.  Some Illinois districts have moved towards or have already started using standards-based policies and some have encountered turbulence.  I believe there’s consensus that averaging grades isn’t always the best option.  Moving away from that will cause some to squirm and ensuring that there’s a smooth transition won’t be easy.  Communication and consistency will play a major role in how it’s received by all stakeholders.

*Bonus – the presenter introduced the think, ink, share process.  I wasn’t aware of this and am planning on trying it out in a couple days.

Exploring Fractions – Week One

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 9.05.40 PM.png

My third grade students started a new unit on fractions last week.  They started the unit by learning about part-to-whole fractions and how to identify them.  Student teams explored how fractions are represented in different situations.  One of the first activities asked students to create their own version of a part-to-whole model.  The scissors came out early this week while students cut out fraction area models.

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 8.28.43 PM.png

They compared the pieces within the area models to create equivalent fractions.  This gave students another way to compare and observe equivalencies.  This was time consuming activity, but so worth the time.  Students made connections and played around with the circles/pieces to compare the models.  The only negative was that some students didn’t cut the fractions exactly on the line so the pieces didn’t always line up.  The next day students compared the fraction pieces using <, >, or = signs.

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 8.36.15 PM.png

Students were making progress in comparing fraction area models.  The fraction circles were being used consistently and then the class moved to transitioning to identifying and placing fractions on number lines.  This was a challenge.  We started with a 0-1 line and then identified half.  From there students used benchmarks to compare fractions on line.  Students had some trouble when the number line was stretched from 0-2.  The class also explored how the fractions look on a vertical number line.  A different dynamic was at play there.  Students then practiced a bit more with an Open Middle activity.

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 8.57.31 PM.png

Students were given opportunities to discuss fractions with their peers through a few different fraction math talks earlier in the week.  The time spent today revolved around reviewing different fraction models. On Friday, the class participated in a fraction Desmos Polygraph activity.  Feel free to use the program here.  This was one of the learning highlights of the week.  Students were asked to pick one of the fraction models that they created early in the week, while other students asked questions to help determine the fraction.

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 8.52.10 PM.png

At first students asked questions related to the color of the fraction.  Then they moved to questions involving less than half and more than half.  Students found that clear questions revealed better answers.

Screen Shot 2018-10-26 at 8.59.37 PM.png

I was excited to see that students were using benchmarks and part-to-whole ideas to help uncover the mystery pick.  Students spent around 20-30 minutes exploring the polygraph with a few different partners.   I even snuck in as a participant.  I’ll be keeping this idea in my back pocket for next year’s plans.

Next week, students will start to add and subtraction fractions.  I’m looking forward to seeing how students will use the experiences this week.  There’s plenty more to this unit and we’re just getting started.

Division and Area Models

 

 

Area Model-01

My fourth grade group just finished up a unit on division.  They spent a great deal of time exploring division and what that means in the context of a variety of situations.  One of the more interesting parts of the unit delved into the use of the partial-quotients method.

You might be a fan of this method if you’ve ever wanted to know why the traditional division algorithm works.  I was in that boat.  During my K-12 math experience I never questioned what was introduced.  I was always encouraged to use the traditional division algorithm.  It didn’t make sense to me why I was dropping zeros or setting up the problem in a certain structure.  I just played school and figured that it wasn’t worth trying to find meaning, but instead just pass the class and move on.

For the past ten years I have been introducing the partial-quotients method to students.  This method brings more meaning to why the division process works.  Students also seems to grasp a better understanding of how partial-quotients can add up to a quotient with a remainder.

This year I introduced something different to the students.  Students were asked to use the partial-quotients method to divide numbers and then create an area model of the process.  I had quite a few confused looks as most students think of multiplication when using area models.  After modeling this a bit I noticed that students continued to have issues with appropriately spacing out their area models.  This was a great opportunity for students to use trial-and-error.

I noticed that students had to first use the partial-quotients method to find the quotient and remainder.  They then had to split up the area model into sections that matched the problem.  This spatial awareness piece is so important, yet I find students struggled with it to a point that they were asking for help.  Maybe it’s a lack of exposure, but estimating where to split up an area model to match the partial-quotients seemed to challenge students on another level.

This activity has me wondering how often students use spatial awareness strategies in the math classroom.  How often are they given these opportunities?  Reasoning and estimating strategies also play a role, but actually spacing out the partitions isn’t what students were expecting last week.

I’m looking forward to seeing how students progress in using area models moving forward.

Second Attempts and Error Analysis

 

Error Analysis-01.png

I’ve been thinking about student math reflections this week.  That reflection can take on many different forms. Giving students a second attempt to complete an assignment can give them an opportunity to reflect on their original performance. This is often (not not always) part of a standards-based-grading approach.  Some teachers allow students to redo particular assignments.  Some teachers have their students complete a paper form of a reflection and/or redo sheet when they didn’t meet the original expectations.  Students fill out the sheet, redo certain problems that need a second look, staple the sheet and finally turn the work back in.  This process has worked well during the past year, but I’m noticing that students are starting to place general statements in the blank lines.  This NY –> M process was starting to become more paperwork than individual reflection.

Screen Shot 2018-02-18 at 1.27.14 PM

Students would avoid writing simple mistake like the plague (since it explicitly says not to do that :)), but they’d write comments that were very general.  I mean VERY general.  Students would write

  • “I didn’t write the answer correctly”
  • “I had trouble with fractions”
  • “I didn’t write the problem right”

Most of the responses were general, and some students wouldn’t even thoroughly review their work before attaching the second attempt sheet.  Don’t get me wrong though.  The sheet was helpful, but I wanted students to delve deeper into their work and become better, or more aware, of where they didn’t meet the expectations moving forward.  Over the summer I was able to attend sessions and workshops related to student goal setting and student error-analysis.  I believe student reflection and error-analysis can be powerful tools for students as well as teachers.  Knowing this, I revamped the second attempt sheet this week.  Here’s the new look.

Screen Shot 2018-10-05 at 6.55.35 PM.png

The blue circles were entered on the sheet based on the most common errors that I found on quizzes.  I made sure to model this with the class before students filled them out.  I gave examples of why someone would check each box.  After a number of questions, students felt more comfortable in deciding which circle to check – some even thought that multiple circles could be checked.  Why not?  I noticed that students would determine which circle to check depending on their perspective.  Check out the three submitted sheets below.  They all are for the same problem, but fit different categories.

MathCoding-01.png

This is interesting because students were starting to analyze their results with a more critical eye.  This is progress, positive progress.  Even with that being said, we have a long way to go.  I need to be more clear on how students should differentiate between a simple mistake and directions.  I also need to clarify and give more examples of what a strategy issue means.  I think some students have been using the updated sheet with integrity, while others might not be using them as well since their perception of the categories isn’t clear.  I believe this is more of a teacher and modeling issue than a student issue.  I’m looking forward to creating a few different activities for next week to help students becoming better at categorizing their errors and misconceptions.  At some point I’d like that awareness to lead to action and eventually goal setting.  One step at a time.

Student Self-Reflection and Common Math Errors

Screen Shot 2018-09-22 at 2.31.17 PM

My fourth grade students took their first unit assessment of the year last Wednesday.  This is the first class to take an assessment this school year.  The unit took around four weeks and explored topics such as area, volume, number sentences, and a few different pre-algebra skills.  This year I’ve been approaching student reflection and unit assessments differently.

Students were given their study guide during the first couple days of the first unit.  The study guide included questions that covered topics that would be taught throughout the unit.  At first students were confused about how to complete items that we haven’t covered yet.  Eventually students became more comfortable with the new study guide procedure as we explored topics and they completed the study guide as the unit progressed.  There were a couple of students that lost their study guides, but they were able to print it off from my school website.  I reviewed the study guide with the class the day before the test.  It took around 10-15 minutes to review, instead of around 40-50, which has been the norm in the past.

After students finished the study guide the class reviewed the skills that were going to be assessed.  Students informally rated where they were at in relation to the skill.  I decided to move in this direction as I’m finding that reflection on achievement or perceived achievement doesn’t always have to happen after the assessment.

Students took the test and I passed back the results the next day.  Like in past years, I have my students fill out a test reflection and goal setting page.  This page is placed in their math journals and I review it with each student.  I decided to use Pam’s idea on lagging homework/coding and add this to my student reflections.  Last year my students used a reflection sheet that indicated problems that were correct or incorrect and they developed goals based on what they perceived as strengths and improvement areas.  This year I’m attempting to go deeper and have students look at not only correct/incorrect, but also at error analysis.

So I handed back the tests and displayed an image on the whiteboard.

mathcoding -01.png

I told the students that we’d be using coding in math today.  I reviewed the different symbols and what they represented with a test that was already graded.  Each question would be given a code of correct, label / calculation error, misconception, or math explanation. I gave multiples examples of what these might look like on an assessment.   I spent the bulk of my time introducing this tool to the misconception symbol (or as some students say the “X-Men” symbol) to the students.  After a decent amount of time discussing what that looks like, students had a good feel for why they might use the math explanation symbol.

I then passed out the sheet to the students.

Screen Shot 2018-09-22 at 2.07.02 PM.png

Students went through their individual test and coded each question based on the key.  At first many students wanted to use the label/ calculation error code for wrong answers, but then they stopped and really looked at why their answer didn’t meet the expectation. In some cases, yes, it was a label issue.  Other times it was an insufficient math explanation.  Most of the students were actually looking at their test through  different lens.  Some were still fixated on the grade and points, but I could see a shift in perception for others.  That’s an #eduwin in my book.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

After students filled out the top portion of the reflection sheet they moved to the rest of the sheet.

Screen Shot 2018-09-22 at 2.11.02 PM.png

Students filled out the remaining part of the reflection sheet.  They then brought up their test and math journal to review the entry.  At this time I discussed the students’ reflection and perception of their math journey and I made a few suggestions in preparation for the next unit.

At some point I’d like create an “If This Than That” type of process for students as they code their results.  For example, If a student is finding that their math explanations need improvement then they can ________________ .  This type of growth focus might also help students see themselves as more owners of their learning.  I’m looking forward to using this same process with my third and fifth grade classes next week.

Third Grade Math Confidence

Screen Shot 2018-09-15 at 3.06.58 PM

My third grade students have been working on rounding and estimating this week.  It’s been a challenge as these concepts are fairly new to the entire class.  We’ve only been in school for only three weeks but I feel like we’re in stride now.  Kids and teachers both are in a routines and tests are already on the schedule.

Back to rounding and estimating.   So students have been struggling a bit with these two concepts as we head towards using the standard algorithm. With that struggle comes a shake in math confidence.  Students needed to be reminded of our class expectation of “lean into the struggle” many times during the past week.  It’s interesting how a student’s math confidence changes throughout a unit, or even throughout the year.  This third grade class in particular is working on becoming more aware of their math performance compared to what’s expected.  In order to reach that goal, I dug back into my files and found a simple, yet powerful tool that might help students on this awareness math journey.

Screen Shot 2018-09-15 at 2.50.55 PM.png

Basically, students first read the top row goal. They were then given a die to create an example of the goal.  During this process students circled one of the emoji symbols to indicate their confidence level.  The extremely giddy emoji indicates that they could teach another student how to complete the goal.  The OK smiley means that you’re fairly confident, but feel like you might not be able to answer a similar question in a different context.  The straight line emoji means that you’re confidence is lacking and you might need some extra help.  This paper wasn’t graded and that was communicated to the students.

Regardless of the emoji that is circled, students are required to attempt each goal.  Some students were very elaborate with explaining their thinking, while others tried to make their answer as concise as possible.  After completing this students submitted their work to an online portfolio system so parents can also observe progress that’s been made.  So far it’s been a success.  I’d like to use this simple tool for the rest of the first unit and possibly the next.  It takes time, but as usual in education, the teacher has to decide whether it’s worth that time or not.  In my case, the student reflection has meaning and it’s directly tied to the goals of the class.  I’m looking forward to seeing how these responses change over time. Feel free to click here for a copy of the sheet if you’d like one.