The Principals Role as Leader of Change

___________
Critical Element Paper #4
Presented to the Department of Educational Leadership
and Postsecondary Education
University of Northern Iowa
__________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Master of Arts in Education or Advanced Studies Certificate
__________
By
Lori C. Reschly
North Bend Elementary
North Liberty, IA
November 2015
__________
Dr. Benjamin Forsyth

Introduction
Seven of my eleven years as an educator have been spent serving at North Bend
Elementary (NBE). NBE is one of the four elementary schools in the Clear Creek Amana School
District (CCA). Located in North Liberty, this school was established in 2008 making this its
eighth year. An addition was built on to NBE in 2013 providing space for seven additional
classrooms. Last year, we served roughly 450 students. At the start of this year, 360 students
were enrolled at NBE. Ninety of the students attending NBE in the 2014-15 school year now
attend Tiffin Elementary a new elementary school that opened this fall. In addition, NBE has a
very transit population with more young professional families.
Supporting the rapid student growth we have experienced over recent years has been a
challenge; CCA continues to build structures and systems of support as we move from a smaller,
rural district to a much larger district with a more diverse clientele. Last year, two of our
elementary schools were schools in need of assistance (SINA) for math. It was through that
process that leadership teams from these two buildings partnered with Grant Wood Area
Education Agency (GWAEA) to look at data, identify goals, and create a detailed plan to
increase student achievement over the next three years. District administration committed to
partnering with GWAEA for this project and believed all elementary students would benefit. As
a result, all four elementary schools are involved with this project.
Description of Intervention
This action plan has been designed to target number sense. The goal is for students to
develop and apply higher-order operations that are critical for mathematical achievement
become flexible thinkers and respect themselves as mathematicians. Our teachers will
Include research based instructional strategies while teaching mathematics promote
an environment that encourages multiple pathways in solving mathematical problems

engage students by using talk moves to support classroom discussions be given a

change to practice and get feedback from instructors. This will be done with an
experience, observe, co-plan and rehearse, try-out, and debrief model implement Iowa
Core mathematics by utilizing knowledge of standards for mathematical practice,
problem types, and best practices in developing fluency (Grant Wood Area Education
Agency, 2015-2016).
Implementing this three-year action plan includes the following. Students in grades K-5 will be
given a math pre-assessment at the start of each year. (See Appendix A for Pre-Assessment
Questions for Grades K-5). During the first year, teachers will have two full days of professional
development. Teachers will also attend a half-day grade level math lab every month. At math
labs, teachers will learn about a new math instructional strategy (from Number Sense Routines)
and a new talk move. (See Appendix C for Talk Moves to Support Classroom Discussions). They
will design a lesson together and watch the strategy modeled in a classroom, with time for
reflection built in. Following math labs, teachers will be responsible for implementing the new
instructional strategy and talk move with their students one time each week. Math consultants
from GWAEA will visit each classroom once a month to give authentic feedback. This process
will continue through the entire year. Students will be given a post-assessment in May. During
years two and three, the same format will occur. The difference from year one is the number of
math labs and full-day professional development decrease slightly each year.
Review of Related Literature
This action research supports the work of an instructional leader and my philosophy of
educational leadership. Knowing how to successfully encourage, equip, and empower teachers to
do their job well is a strength of an effective educational leader. According to Whitaker (2013),
Great principals focus on students by focusing on teachers (p. 41). She is an advocate for

students, and this is reflected in the priority placed on putting proper support in place for
teachers. Time and energy are devoted to challenging and encouraging teachers to grow and
develop into the best teachers possible. Teachers are provided the tools and training needed to do
the job well. This project does just that. It places high priority on educating and supporting
teachers as they implement highly effective and innovative math instructional strategies and
practices into the classroom to increase student achievement. It is designed to challenge teachers,
while scaffolding learning and equipping them to become more effective.
This action research project is also supported by the current research of the development
of number sense. Focusing on number sense is essential. It needs to be continuous and ongoing
for students. According to Shumway (2011),
Students who struggle in math often lack number sense. It is difficult to compute
without number sense. It is a struggle to find relationships amongst numbers or equations
without number sense. It is more arduous to figure out measurement, geometry, and data
problems without number sense. In other words, number sense is the foundational
building block for all strands of mathematics (p. 8).
Another educator and researchers personal experience was as follows. As Parrish (2010)
began to expect them (students) to reason, make sense, and construct strategies built
upon numerical relationships (her) classroom was transformed from a didactic, static
instructional environment to one characterized by listening, reasoning, justifying,
applying patterns, and communicating conjectures and generalizations. Number talks
were at the heart of this personal classroom transformation and served as a catalyst to
begin developing the mathematical dispositions and habits of mind for learning, doing,
and applying mathematics (p. xxiii).

The way this initiative has been designed also aligns with research on the integration of
effective classroom discussions otherwise known as math talks, strategy sharing, and number
talks. Productive mathematical discussions, such as strategy sharing, help students develop
understanding and fluency with mathematical concepts and procedures (Hintz, 2013, p. 324).
There are also numerous other benefits to number talks. According to Parrish (2010),
Students have the opportunity to: 1) Clarify their own thinking. 2) Consider and test
other strategies to see if they are mathematically logical. 3) Investigate and apply
mathematical relationships. 4) Build a repertoire of efficient strategies. 5) Make decisions
about choosing efficient strategies for specific problems (p. 11).
Shumway (2011) agrees: Discussion among students is an absolutely critical component in their
mathematical development. When students talk about mathematical concepts and strategies, they
are using and creating knowledge (p. 120). Therefore, knowing this action plan has been
designed to support the development of number sense through ongoing instructional routines and
classroom discussions, I believe this plan has been well researched and planned.
Data Collection
Knowing this is a three-year project and a significant district initiative, I explored the
impact this initiative and the incorporation of more researched-based math strategies has had on
teacher and student performance during the first semester of implementation. Students in grades
K-5 were given the pre-assessment. Students in kindergarten and first-grade were given this test
in a one-to-one setting. This was structured as an interview, and students were given the
opportunity to share their thinking using words, pictures, or manipulatives (cubes). Students in
grades 2-5 were given this assessment in a small group setting. The assessment was read aloud to
all students, and students worked independently to solve the problems. When they were finished,
they checked out with an adult. When checking out, like kindergarten and first-grade students,

students in grades 2-5 were given the opportunity to share their thinking using words, pictures, or
manipulatives (cubes). Pre-assessment data was compiled and analyzed. (See Appendix B for
Pre-Assessment Scoring Sheets for Grades K-5).
Classroom observation data was collected during the months of October and November. I
gathered information from two kindergarten classrooms, two first-grade classrooms, three
second-grade classrooms, and two sixth-grade classrooms. For this, I utilized the Math Talk
Learning Community Rubric a tool found in Describing Levels and Components of a MathTalk Learning Community from Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (See Appendix
D). Classroom observation data provided insight to teacher-student interactions, as related to this
district initiative.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Pre-assessment data collection included scoring the answer as correct or incorrect and
identifying the strategy the student used to answer the question. Below are graphs showing the
number of students in each grade level that answered each question correctly or incorrectly.
These graphs also show the number of students in each grade level that did or did not use a
strategy to solve each problem. Using a strategy to solve a problem was independent of a correct
or incorrect answer; meaning students could have used a strategy to solve a problem with an
incorrect final answer.
Kindergarten
Examining the data closely, the majority of the 166 kindergarten students answered all four
questions incorrectly. Ninety-three students used a strategy to solve the first problem; a strong
majority did not use a strategy when solving the last three problems.

7
160
140
120
100
Students with Correct Answer

80
60

Students with Incorrect Answer

40

Students with Strategy

20

Students with No Strategy

0
1

Ques/ons
Kindergarten Pretest

First Grade
Of the 144 first grade students, thirty-three students answered the first problem correctly; eightytwo students used a strategy to solve this problem. Seventy-seven first-grade students answered
question two correctly; 112 students used a strategy when solving this problem. Fifty-five
students answered question three correctly, while eighty-seven students used a strategy when
solving this problem. A large majority of first-grade students answered questions four and five
incorrectly, and the majority did not use a strategy to solve these problems.
160
140
120
100

Students with Correct Answer

80
60

Students with Incorrect Answer

40

Students with Strategy

20

Students with No Strategy

0
1

Ques/ons
First Grade Pretest

Second Grade
The majority of the 182 second-grade students answered questions 1-5 incorrectly; question four
had the fewest number of students answering the problem correctly with twenty-one. The use of
strategies varied among problems. All students used a strategy to solve question one. Ninety-four
students used a strategy to solve question two; sixty students used a strategy to solve question
three. Roughly twenty-five students used a strategy when solving questions four and five.
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Students with Correct Answer

Students with Incorrect Answer
Students with Strategy
Students with No Strategy
1

Ques/ons
Second Grade Pretest

Third Grade
Fifty-nine of the 178 third-grade students answered question one correctly. 108 students
answered question two correctly, seventy-six students answered questions three correctly, sixteen
answered question four correctly, and forty-four students answered number five correctly. Of the
178 students, 119 used a strategy to solve question one. 141 students used a strategy when
answering question two, 111 students used a strategy to solve question three, seventy-two
students used a strategy to solve question four, and fifty students used a strategy when solving
question 5.

9
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Students with Correct Answer

Students with Incorrect Answer
Students with Strategy
Students with No Strategy
1

Ques/ons
Third Grade Pretest

Fourth Grade
Slightly more than one third or sixty-six of the 172 fourth-grade students tested answered all of
six questions correctly. Question two had the most students answer correctly with 105, while
question five had the fewest answer correctly with sixty-six. The greatest increase in the number
of students using a strategy to solve each problem occurred from third to fourth-grade. More than
110 fourth-grade students used a strategy when answering five of the six problems.
160
140
120
100
Students with Correct Answer

80
60

Students with Incorrect Answer

40

Students with Strategy

20

Students with No Strategy

0
1

Ques/ons
Fourth Grade Pretest

10

Fifth Grade
More than one hundred of the 159 fifth-grade students answered four of the six problems
correctly. With the exception of question five, a strong majority used a strategy to solve these
problems. The greatest being the number of students using a strategy to answer question two
with 152. One hundred forty-four students used a strategy to solve question six. The question the
fewest number of students used a strategy to solve was number five with sixty-seven students.
160
140
120
100
Students with Correct Answer

80
60

Students with Incorrect Answer

40

Students with Strategy

20

Students with No Strategy

0
1

Ques/ons
FiGh Grade Pretest

Overall, I noticed a steady increase of the use of strategies as students progressed through
the grade levels. More first-grade students used strategies when solving problems than
kindergartners. More second-grade students applied strategies compared to first-grade students
and so forth through fifth-grade. In addition, with the exception of second-grade data, an increase
of number of students answering a question correctly occurred as students progressed through
the grade levels. Questions I wonder regarding the data collection process for fourth and fifthgrades include: Why are pre-assessment questions the same? How does that fact impact the data
we collected? Would we have seen the same increase in fifth-grade students were asked more
challenging questions than fourth-grade students?

11

The baseline data that was collected was plentiful. In addition to what I have shared, if
one were interested, she could examine each question for every grade and identify the specific
strategies students used to solve. This data would allow for one to learn how students at every
level approach problem solving and would also highlight additional areas needing focus. At this
point in the project, I have yet to examine the data from that perspective.
The goal of this project is to develop number sense by utilizing math talks. As a result, I
reflected upon the baseline data I shared and considered the type of ongoing data to collect
throughout this project. Classroom observation data provided opportunities to see how teachers
are integrating the strategies and talk moves into their regular mathematical routines. Data was
collected using the Math Talk Learning Community Rubric. This rubric gives descriptions that
provide teachers with steps to develop their classroom into a rich math-talk learning
community (Hufferd-Ackles, K., Fuson, K.C., & Sher, M.G., 2004, p. 82).
Nine classrooms were observed during the months of October and November. During
these visits based on teacher-student interactions teachers were categorized according to
Level based on the Math Talk Learning Community Rubric. Two teachers a kindergarten
teacher and a second-grade teacher were at Level 0. This can be best described as traditional
teacher-directed classroom with brief answer responses from students (Hufferd-Ackles, et al.,
2004, p. 88). Three of our teachers a first-grade teacher, a second-grade teacher, and a fifthgrade teacher were at Level 1. According to Hufferd-Ackles, et al. (2004), a Level 1 teacher is
described as beginning to pursue student mathematical thinking. He plays a central role in the
math-talk community (p. 89). Two additional teachers a first-grade teacher and a secondgrade teacher were described at Level 2. They were modeling and helping students build new
roles. Some co-teaching and co-learning begins as student-to-student talk increases (p. 89).
Finally, there were two teachers a kindergarten teacher and a fifth-grade teacher that were

12

considered Level 2 for Questioning and Responsibility of Learning and Level 3 for Explaining
Mathematical Thinking and Source of Mathematical Ideas. A teacher facilitating learning at a
Level 3 is a co-teacher and co-learner... (she) monitors all that occurs, still fully engaged is
ready to assist, but now in more peripheral monitoring role (p. 90).
Current classroom observation data highlights the diversity of teachers at NBE. There are
teachers falling within each of these four categories. Due to the newness of this initiative, I
wonder the role the initiative has played into the instructional practices of teachers falling into
Level 2 and Level 3. Has it had impact? Or, was classroom observation merely a reflection of
teachers prior instructional practices and management styles? Regardless, the data provides
valuable information regarding how teachers are implementing the strategies and communicates
there is continued work to be done!
Conclusion
Growth is definitely happening. However, lasting, impacting change takes time, support,
and commitment. This action research project is a project I believe will greatly influence the
mathematical instructional practices of CCA elementary teachers for many years to come. I
believe the small changes we have already started to experience will continue as we engage in
this learning with longevity and are committed to this project as demonstrated by the use of our
time and the support from district leaders and GWAEA consultants.
Reflection
Reflecting upon the implementation of this district initiative, I believe we have gotten off
to a great start. The design of this professional learning has been well planned and addresses the
needs of adult learners. One struggle we have encountered during the first three months of this
project is teacher buy-in. Due to the nature of our math labs and other demands teachers are
facing, some teachers have not bought into this initiative. One significant demand impacting

13

this initiative and staff moral is piloting new math curriculum. Before Christmas break, each
elementary teacher will have taught from four different math curriculums. Teachers have use of
each set of curricular materials for one month before materials are rotated amongst the four
elementary buildings.
The biggest change I made during the course of this action research project was the way
in which I collected ongoing data. Originally, I was only planning to collect data in November. I
was going to do this by having a small group of students from each grade level complete a midyear assessment using the same questions from the pre-assessment. After discussing this with my
mentor, I decided to give the mid-year assessment and also collect classroom observation data
during the months of October and November. Reflecting further on the initiative and the
longevity of this initiative, I decided to only collect the classroom observation data. Knowing
this initiative is first focused on teacher behavior, I did not think the mid-year assessments would
provide the data and information I was looking for. The Math Talk Learning Community Rubric
gathered useful information, as it identified specific behaviors of the teachers and students
revolving around best practice when implementing talk moves into the classroom. Please note: If
I were to start this project again, I would make sure my schedule allowed for me to visit
classrooms from every grade level. I believe this would have given a more comprehensive
picture of how teachers were integrating these strategies in grades K-5.
This action research project supports the change process at North Bend. Increased student
achievement is our ultimate goal. Our school improvement plan includes detailed actionable
steps for the purpose of increasing teacher knowledge and understanding. The plan and the way
we are implementing it supports teachers as they grow and develop as educators, which leads to
increased student learning. Recognizing the changes that have already started to occur and also
the work that is still yet to be done, I support the decision our administrative team made when

14

committing three years to this initiative. Too often in education, initiatives are started without
long-term commitment. This plan has been designed to support teachers as they are challenged to
change their instructional practices. In addition, the feedback following classroom visits has been
extremely impactful and has allowed for differentiation amongst teachers.
If I were making recommendations to our administration, I would recommend continuing
the initiative as planned. I would recommend more closely analyzing beginning-of-the-year preassessment data, looking for trends and patterns to the types of strategies students used at every
grade level of the different types of questions. In addition, I would suggest considering end-ofyear student assessment data paired with classroom observation data when planning for next
year. Knowing math piloting will be done in December, teachers will be using a familiar
curriculum and will have more time to focus on math strategies and math talks during the spring
semester. I believe, as a result, we will continue to see an even greater increase in teachers
implementing these strategies into their classrooms leading to increased student achievement.
And, if we do not see an increase of student achievement at that point, we will have eliminated
some factors impacting this initiative and will have a better understanding of how it is or is not
supporting classroom teachers.

15

Appendix A Pre-Assessment Questions for Grades K-5

Kindergarten
1. Count the cubes so I can hear you. How could you draw a picture to show how many
cubes there are in all? Please show on the paper. (Use 30 cubes)
2. Josie had a sticker collection. She started with 5 stickers. Her mom gave her 7 more
stickers. How many stickers does she have now?
3. Cams grandma made cookies. She had 3 plates. Each plate had 5 cookies on it. How
many cookies did grandma make?
4. Tom and Ali shared 4 cookies. They wanted to have the same amount with none left over.
How many cookies did each child get?
First Grade
1. Count the cubes so I can hear you. How could you draw a picture to show how many
cubes there are in all? Please show on the paper. (Use 45 cubes)
2. Josie had a sticker collection. She started with 5 stickers. Her mom gave her 7 more
stickers. How many stickers does she have now?
3. Cams grandma made cookies. She had 3 plates. Each plate had 5 cookies on it. How
many cookies did grandma make?
4. Tom and Ali shared 5 cookies. They wanted to have the same amount with none left over.
What amount did each child get?
5. What value makes this number sentence true?
9 + 3 = ___ + 5
Second Grade
1. Landon had 28 stickers. His mom gave him some more stickers for his birthday. Now
Landon has 61 stickers. How many stickers did his mom give him?
2. Addy had 5 packs of pencils. There were 12 pencils in each pack. How many pencils did
she have?
3. Blaine had 146 pieces of candy. He wanted to put 10 candies in each box. How many
boxes did he need? How many candies were left over?
4. 4 children shared 9 cookies. They each got the same amount with none left over. How
many cookies did each child get?
5. What value makes this number sentence true?
9 + 3 = ___ + 5
Third Grade
1. Landon had 28 stickers. His mom gave him some more stickers for his birthday. Now
Landon has 111 stickers. How many stickers did his mom give him?
2. Addy had 5 packs of pencils. There were 12 pencils in each pack. How many pencils did
she have?
3. Blaine had 146 pieces of candy. He wanted to put 10 candies in each box. How many
boxes did he need? How many candies were left over?

16

4. 6 children shared 10 cookies. They each got the same amount with none left over. How
many cookies did each child get?
5. What value makes this number sentence true?
9 + 3 = ___ + 5
Fourth Grade and Fifth Grade
1. Landon had 28 stickers. His mom gave him some more stickers for his birthday. Now
Landon has 111 stickers. How many stickers did his mom give him?
2. Addy had 8 packs of pencils. There were 12 pencils in each pack. How many pencils did
she have?
3. Blaine had 246 pieces of candy. He wanted to put 10 candies in each box. How many
boxes did he need? How many candies were left over?
4. 6 children shared 10 cookies. They each got the same amount with none left over. How
many cookies did each child get?
5. What value makes this number sentence true?
9 + 3 = ___ + 5
6. 45 26 + 25 = ___
Instructional Strategies that Influence K-5 Mathematics Grant Wood AEA
Adapted from word by Elham Kazemi, University of Washington: https://education.uw.edu/people/faculty/ekazemi

Appendix B Pre-Assessment Scoring Sheets for Grades K-5

17

18

19

20

21

Appendix C Talk Moves to Support Classroom Discussions

22

Appendix D Math Talk Learning Community Rubric

23

24

References
Grant Wood Area Education Agency (2015-2016). Memorandum of understanding.
Hintz, A.B. (2013). Strengthening discussions. Teaching Children Mathematics, 20(5), 318-324.
Hufferd-Ackles, K., Fuson, K.C., & Sher, M.G. (2004). Describing levels and components of a
math-talk learning community. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(2),
81-116.
Kazemi, E. & Hintz, A. (2014). Intentional talk: How to structure and lead productive
mathematical discussions. Portland, MN: Stenhouse Publishers.
Parrish, S. (2010). Number talks: Helping children build mental math and computation
strategies. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.
Shumway, J.F. (2011). Number sense routines: Building numerical literacy every day in grades
K-3. Portland, MN: Stenhouse Publishers.
Whitaker, T. (2012). What great principals do differently: 18 things that matter most. (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Routledge.