KSDE Standard 9 artifact portion of KPTP

Narrative 4.1.1 Reflection on Learning Objectives (limited to 2 pages) Based on the analysis of all the assessment results, identify TWO learning objectives from the unit where students were most successful. Objective 1: The student can add multi-digit numbers using the U.S. standard (traditional) algorithm. (objective #3) Discuss at least TWO things to do differently in the future to extend these successes to continue students academic growth. This learning objective was successful for two I would like to see students transfer their reasons. One reason is that the majority of knowledge of carrying into regrouping during the class had a solid foundation in adding subtraction, so to help them connect the two using the traditional algorithm already in concepts together, I would use base-ten second grade, which made reviewing the skill blocks models with the students to drive that in this unit easy. Another reason is I chose an point. I also think it would help students to engaging, student-centered math puzzle as connect the traditional algorithm with the the instructional activity to help further solidify partial sum algorithm. I think they are not as their pre-existing skill. I think the format of the fluent as I would like with composing and math puzzle reminded students of place decomposing numbers, so I want to do some value placement when carrying during types of instructional activities relating to addition, and as a result, they were able to composing and decomposing numbers and transfer that knowledge in the posttying that concept to both the traditional assessment. algorithm and partial sum algorithm. Objective 2: This learning objective was not as successful The next time I teach this lesson I would The student can solve addition and as I would like it to be, which is for students to integrate problem solving strategies such as subtraction problems using one or more types be fluent in using graphic act it out, make a drawing or diagram, of graphic organizers. (objective #1) organizers/diagrams to solve word problems. construct a table, etc. with the graphic However, I feel students made gains with this organizers/diagram because I feel the objective. I attribute the cooperative learning graphic organizers/diagrams are not enough activity number heads together as one for students to comprehend the word reason for the gains in this objective because problem. Also, I want to incorporate more the students who were struggling were able algebraic thinking into the problem solving, to hear many times from other students how specifically with the concept that sometimes they got the answer during this student the unknown number isnt always going to be centered instructional activity. Another reason the sum. However, exactly how or what for the gains in this objective is giving student instructional activities can be useful in time for independent practice using the teaching algebraic thinking I do not know. I everyday math math journals, and being able welcome and want to learn more on how to to utilize other adults in the classroom while teach algebraic thinking to students. Give more than one reason for each of the successes identified.

students do independent practice so when students need help, they have almost immediate feedback and help from an adult to clarify their thinking.

Based on the analysis of all the assessment results, identify TWO learning objectives from the unit where students were least successful. Objective 1: The student can justify why one type of graphic organizer work better than another for him or her. (objective #4)

Give more than one reason for the identified lack of success for each. There are a couple of reasons why this objective was unsuccessful. One reason is the lack of time, in two specific places. One, there are only 60 minutes of math core time daily, and although there is an additional 30 minutes of math tier intervention time, the district prefers those 30 minutes used to reinforce previously taught skills instead of teaching new skills or concepts. Another place where time is lacking is the need to follow the district sequencing guide. One other reason this objective was unsuccessful was my own lack of experience in teaching problem solving. I was surprised and frustrated that students were unable to use the graphic organizers/diagrams fluently due to their inability in determining operations in word problems. After sharing my frustrations with my cooperating teacher, she provided valuable insight to the cognitive development of third graders and suggestions for what and how to teach problem solving better in the future.

Discuss at least TWO things to differently in the future to improve students performance. The next time I teach this lesson I would integrate problem solving strategies such as act it out, make a drawing or diagram, construct a table, etc. with the graphic organizers/diagram because the graphic organizers/diagrams are not enough for students to comprehend the word problem, and therefore students were unable to justify their choice of graphic organizer. Another thing I would do differently is to modify my pacing of the lessons better. After the informal observations I should have shifted the focus of the lesson to problem solving and higher level thinking skills instead the addition algorithms.

Objective 2: The student can add multi-digit numbers using partial sums algorithm. (objective #2)

One reason this objective was unsuccessful was that this class was really good at the traditional algorithm that they are uncomfortable using a different kind of algorithm even though both algorithms were taught in second grade. Another reason this objective was unsuccessful is because students do not see the connection between the two types of algorithm, and have not connected the concepts of place value to the algorithms well.

In the future, I would like to put the emphasis on composing and decomposing numbers and connecting that concept to the partial sums algorithm, so that students can make the connections between adding with regrouping and subtracting with regrouping. I would also utilize base ten blocks first instead of jumping into the algorithm because I think student would understand partial sums better if they see it modeled using base ten blocks first.

Based on the analysis of assessment results, what other conclusions could be made about the students learning? One thing I noticed during informal observations was that due to the students lack of algebraic thinking, they are limited in creating math word problems. The word problems they created were simple, such as Jack has 103 pencils, and Jill has 67 pencils. How many pencils do they have in all? Another thing I noticed was the students were very weak in their subtraction with regrouping skills. Another reas on problem solving was difficult for them was after they have determined the operation is subtraction, they had trouble computing the correct answer.

Based on the analysis of assessment results, how did making adaptations to instruction ultimately affect student learning? I think the adaptations made for the subgroup, especially by modifying the numbers, providing adult support, and reading aloud the word problems had really helped the students in the subgroup, especially students A and B. Students in the subgroup made good gains in the post assessment compared to the pre-assessment.