Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
-Rationale: This objective is being taught to help student identify differences between area and
perimeter.
The lesson prior to this lesson covers the identification and measurement of perimeter. Students
can make connections with what they have learned in order to solve for the area.
This lesson is being taught in this way, using models/square tiles, to give students a concrete
example to what area is and what a square unit is before introducing students to formulas with
multiplication
(length x width = area)
It is important for students to learn this concept in order to further their knowledge of algebraic
thinking
Students can have difficulties separating area and perimeter because these two concepts are often
taught together. It is important to utilize physical models and emphasize vocabulary of these two
concepts separately for students to understand them as their own concepts. Connecting to
multiplication, arrays, and the knowledge of rows and columns emphasizes what area is
measuring by relating back to concepts that they have already learned. (Van de Walle, 2016)
Pre-assessment data shows that even though all students have a basic knowledge of
measurement, multiplication, and repeated addition, students do not know the vocabulary that
belongs with it. None of the students were able to correctly identify the area and perimeter
vocabulary, which is why the SMP being focused on is #6, attention to precision. With attention
to vocabulary students will be able to correctly identify and measure area and perimeter.
Criterion #2: Assessment- Focus on data collection and analysis (20 points)
Description: To complete this criterion, interns will share artifacts and answer the following questions.
Identify the standard and learning objectives targeted in the assessment and the connected lessons.
Artifact: Share Formative/Summative Assessment Tool.
Artifact: Create and share chart/graph of student results from formative assessment administered before
connected lessons (Feap 4f). Please use initials or otherwise protect student identity
Reflection questions
1. How is the assessment tool appropriate to determine student learning needs and aligned with the learning
objective? Intern will make explicit connections between the standard and assessment. For example if the
standard says students will be able to identify shapes-- what question did you ask in the assessment that is
aligned with that part of the standard? (FEAP1d, FEAP 4b)
2. What do students know and what are they able to do? Intern will name explicit objectives, skills etc
related to the standards and identify student current understanding (strengths and areas of need).
(FEAP1d, FEAP 4b)
3. How will you differentiate this lesson based on student need? (FEAP 3c),
4. Explain the ways the assessment selected will/could meet the needs of ELLS (ESOL 5.1)
MAFS.3. MD.3.6: Measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm. square m, square in,
square ft, and improvised units)
-Learning Objective: Given a word problem to solve, SWBAT identify area, define area, and use
square tiles to measure the area of the object given in the problem.
The goal of this assessment was to assess students in the areas of measurement, repeated
addition, multiplication, and vocabulary in regards to area and perimeter. Assessing prior
knowledge of repeated addition, multiplication, and measurement allows us to get a better idea of
where we can start when teaching area, since area builds on these concepts.
-Artifacts and Reflection:
The formative assessment tool was a Show What You Know worksheet from the students Go
Math! textbook. Details of this pre-assessment as well as results from that assessment can be
found below and also in my blog post titled Analyzing Formative Assessment Data. In this
section, the reflection is explained beneath the chart displaying the formative assessment data for
each student
Pre-Assessment:
The formative assessment tool for this semesters connected lesson is a "Show What You
Know" pre-assessment from the students Go Math! textbook. This pre-assessment was given to
students prior to beginning lessons on perimeter and area. The answer key to the assessment is
shown below:
Results of each students data can be found in the chart below. In the chart you will find the
students total percentage of correct answers, if they can measure, if they can multiply, and if they
have any basic knowledge of perimeter and area.
Since this pre-assessment is directly from the students text book, it directly aligns with
their previous and future math lessons, meaning that the assessment gives authentic results
related to what they should already know and projecting the things that they will learn in the
future. When organizing this data into the chart, the categories of measurement and
multiplication were selected based on concepts that the students have already learned. Seeing
that all students understand measurement and multiplication, they are prepared for more in depth
concepts. The columns on area and perimeter were selected because that is the focus of the next
unit. There were only three students who had any knowledge of perimeter, while no students had
knowledge about area. This information shows that when creating a lesson, basic explanation
and exploration of area and perimeter concepts are needed because students have had no
previous experience with either.
Students will be introduced to perimeter first, and then area. This helps scaffold the
concepts of measurement as students move into more abstract content from perimeter to area.
For differentiation purposes, students who need additional support can use manipulatives while
measuring, if needed. Additional one-on-one support is also given during daily independent
work time. For enrichment, students will be given irregular polygons to measure rather than
simple rectangles. This concept is introduced in future units as well. Although there are no
ELL's in this group of students, this pre-assessment is useful for ELL students because it uses a
lot of visual representations rather than reading word problems. However, the back of the
worksheet is strictly vocabulary, which could be difficult for an ELL student. If this assessment
was given to an ELL student, visual representations could be made to represent words in the
venn diagram activity that way the student could demonstrate their knowledge in this way as
well.
-The summative assessment tool was a journal question given at the end of this lesson, shown
below. Results from the test at the end of the unit as well as differentiated group work were also
graded and taken into account.
Criterion #3: Connected Lessons: Using Data to Drive Instruction (15 points)
Description: Interns will present lesson plans that are highlighted based on formative data collection, ongoing
assessment during instruction, and analysis of student work/video/peer discussion between lesson one and lesson
two. Interns will answer questions to demonstrate the ways they used assessment data and student response to drive
their instruction.
Interns will:
1. Highlight day one of the lesson plan to demonstrate the ways they used the formative assessment to plan
instruction. Explain how you used the formative assessment to plan instruction and why your instructional
decisions address student learning needs (FEAP 1e)
2. Highlight day two of the lesson plan to demonstrate the ways you used your analysis of student
work/video/observation data to adapt/modify/add to the lesson plan based on student response to instruction.
Explain how you used the analysis of student work/video/observation data to drive your instruction and why
your instructional decisions address student learning needs (FEAP 3d)
3. Explain how you planned for and implemented a variety in formative assessments, and summative
assessments (including during lessons) to assess ELLs, (ESOL 5.3 )
-Artifact: The lesson plans can be found below and also in my blog post titles Connected
Lesson Plans-Teaching Area. There is a key on the top of each page that indicates the meaning
of each highlighted section as well as the response to student instruction and how the student
data was used.
c. A square with side length 1 unit, called a unit square, is said to have on
be used to measure area.
d. A plane figure, which can be covered without gaps or overlaps by n unit sq
of n square units.
MAFS.3. MD.3.6: Measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm. squ
and improvised units)
Essential Understanding
(What is the big idea or essential
question that you want students to
come away with? In other words,
what, aside from the standard and
our objective, will students
understand when they finish this
lesson?)
Objectives- What are you
teaching?
(Student-centered: What will
students know and be able to do
after this lesson? Include the
ABCDs of objectives: action,
behavior, condition, and degree of
mastery, i.e., "C: Given a sentence
written in the past or present tense,
A: the student B: will be able to rewrite the sentence in future tense
D: with no errors in tense or tense
contradiction (i.e., I will see her
yesterday.)."
Note: Degree of mastery does not
need to be a percentage.)
Rationale
Address the following questions:
Why are you teaching this
objective?
Where does this lesson fit within
a larger plan?
Why are you teaching it this
way?
Why is it important for students
SMP #6: Attention to Precision: This SMP will be addressed with attention
Given a word problem to solve, SWBAT identify area, define area, and use
area of the object given in the problem.
Pre-assessment data shows that even though all students have a basic know
multiplication, and repeated addition, students do not know the vocabulary
of the students were able to correctly identify the area and perimeter vocab
SMP being focused on is #6, attention to precision. With attention to vocab
to correctly identify and measure area and perimeter.
When looking over the pre-assessment data results I could see that stud
understanding of perimeter or area. When introducing the concept of a
concrete as possible for the students. By providing students the opportu
mathematical manipulatives and exposing them to a variety of differen
will be able to achieve this goal.
Using the data from the pre-assessment to have pre-determined differe
activity.
Using HOT questions as formative assessment throughout the lesson.
Monitoring independent work time and observing strategies used by studen
to share their work with the class
Activity worksheets given to differentiated groups can be assessed for mast
Task cards will be given to students to differentiate instruction.
Journal Question at end of lesson is used for a grade/formative assessment.
Lesson Implementation
Teaching Methods
(What teaching method(s) will you
use during this lesson? Examples
Step-by-Step Plan
(What exactly do you plan to do in
teaching this lesson? Be thorough.
Act as if you needed a substitute to
carry out the lesson for you.)
Both
Students
Teacher
Teacher
Student
HOT Questions:
-What strategy did you use to solve this problem?
-How can you find the area of a rectangle if you do
cover the whole shape
-How is area similar/different than perimeter?
*SMP is addressed while asking HOT questions-en
appropriate vocabulary when explaining their think
10
HOT Questions:
-Why is area measured in square units?
-What is area?
-How can two different shapes have the same area?
*These HOT questions directly relate to the SMP.
square unit and area
11
If applicable, how does this lesson connect to the interests and cultural
students?
n/a
If applicable, how does this lesson connect to/reflect the local communi
How will you differentiate instruction for students who need additiona
lesson (enrichment)?
12
How will you differentiate instruction for students who need additiona
Materials
(What materials will you use? Why
did you choose these materials?
Include any resources you used.
This can also include people!)
-AP: Gets off task easily and likes to talk- seated at front of room
-DA: Sometimes needs encouragement and extra support: Seated at table w
who are willing to help
Journal Question:
13
14
15
Criterion #4:
Reflection on Student Learning and Teaching Practice (10 points)
Description: The teacher candidate will present learning statements garnered from analysis of the data collected
across both lessons about the impact of the teaching on student learning. In addition, teacher candidates will draw
conclusions about the process as a whole.
Teacher candidates will share the following:
Artifact: Create and share a chart/graph of student results that compares formative and summative assessment
data (FEAP 4f). This chart will be used as a form of evidence in at least one learning statement. Please take
steps to protect student identity
Learning Statements: Interns will share what they learned about their students as a result of analyzing their data
and present two to three learning statements that are supported by summative analysis chart and other data
(observation data, video, course readings, student work, peer feedback) (Feap 5b)
16
Reflection: Interns will answer the following questions and support their answers using the most powerful data
(FEAP 5c):
1. What were the most powerful adjustments you made during the planning process? What do you believe
would be the most beneficial changes you could make next to improve student learning?
2. What have you learned about using data as a part of your teaching? What did you learn by evaluating data
with your teaching peers?
3. What new wonderings do you have?
-Artifact, Learning Statements, and Reflection: These elements have been addressed in a
reflection on the connected lesson, displayed below, and also posted on my blog titled
Connected Lesson Individual Reflection. In this section, you will find a chart of both the
formative and summative data, learning statements with explanations, and reflection questions
based on the data gained from this experience.
Pre-Assessment Data
Can
Can
They
They
Basic
Measure Multiply Concept
?
?
of Area
Basic
Concept of
Perimeter
Journal
Question
Correct?
Summative
Assessment
Score
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
87%
39%
yes
yes
no
yes
Yes
100%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
61%
yes
yes
no
yes
Yes
100%
50%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
77%
44%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
73%
44%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
100%
44%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
73%
56%
yes
yes
no
yes
Yes
87%
44%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
44%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
73%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
100%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
67%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
100%
39%
yes
yes
no
no
Yes
93%
Class
Average
88.60%
Pre
Assess
ment
Score
Stude
nt 1
Stude
nt 2
Stude
nt 3
Stude
nt 4
Stude
nt 5
Stude
nt 6
Stude
nt 7
Stude
nt 8
Stude
nt 9
Stude
nt 10
Stude
nt 11
Stude
nt 12
Stude
nt 13
Stude
nt 14
Stude
nt 15
Stude
nt 16
Stude
nt 17
Stude
nt 18
Class
Avera
ge
43%
Summative Data
17
18
Learning Statements
From observational data and student assessment data, it is evident that focus on
vocabulary, in regards to SMP 6: attending to precision, was effective in teaching students area.
As seen in the pre-assessment, all students were able to measure and multiply, but none of them
had any knowledge of the basic concept of area. This led us to teach this concept with a focus on
vocabulary. From teaching this lesson with focus on SMP 6 and accurate vocabulary use,
students were able to successfully master this unit, as evidenced by the student data in the chart.
From observational data collected in both of these lessons, we learned that students need
to have a basic concept of the unit square, in regards to both perimeter and area, before
addressing vocabulary. The concept of the unit square should be explicitly taught to students as
its own lesson before introducing it with perimeter and area. This allows students to understand
how unit squares are measured within both concepts and how to differentiate between the two.
Although students were successful in the end, many of the questions during the area lesson could
have been avoided with more attention to the unit square.
FEAP: 5b
Reflection
In our approach to this connected lesson, we chose to focus on the effectiveness of
different teaching methods on the same concept. Although both lessons taught area with
attention to SMP 6: attention to precision, the methods to teaching both lessons were different
and we were able to analyze which methods the students responded to best. From the first lesson
to the second lesson, the most powerful adjustment that we made was the presentation of the
vocabulary to the students. In the first lesson, the students explored area problems independently
and then generated a class definition of area from what they learned while working. It took a lot
19
of redirection and guiding from the teacher to get the students to the correct definition. Not only
did this take a lot of time, but also was not as effective as we thought it would be. Seeing this,
we presented the definition of area, directly from the standard, to the students before they
worked through their practice problems. Teaching this definition explicitly was much more
effective and easy for students to understand.
Although this was an effective way to teach students the basic concept of area, there was
still some confusion with the idea of the unit square. Because students learned perimeter before
this lesson was taught, they had some exposure to the unit square without even knowing it. The
unit square was integrated with area into both the first and second lessons. This would be the
main point of revision to further improve this lesson for the future. Students should learn the
unit square as its own individual entity along with its properties and how it is different when
measuring area and perimeter. This would make a great foundation to teach students area
because they would already know the unit of measurement and how it is different than perimeter.
I have learned the importance of progress monitoring when it comes to keeping track of
student data. It was very interesting to break apart the pre-assessment and see which areas the
students needed more instruction in. All three of our classes had similar results on the preassessment, which lead our focus to be on vocabulary. Not only were we able to keep track of
student progress, but also we were able to carefully look at the effectiveness of our teaching
practices. The emphasis of this connected lesson was the presentation of the information to the
students, and looking at student data gave us the ability to see what needed to be taught and also
measure the effectiveness our methods.
Going forward, I am wondering how my CT uses student data to drive her lesson
planning. I am looking forward to being a part of this data collection and planning process full
20
time. By doing this, I hope to learn how student data collection and planning will work best for
me in my future classroom.
FEAP: 5C
21