Measuring Instructional Impact on Student Learning

Daniel Gallucci
Salem State University
December 22, 2016

Impact Student Learning 1

Abstract
This project is intended to measure the instructional impact on seven eighth
grade English language learners (ELLs) comprehension in mathematics.
Students ELP Levels vary with a range from 1 to 4.8. Depending on the
particular domain of mathematics, students comprehension level range from
below average to average in relation to Common Core State Standards
(CCSS). During this two week unit in the mathematics domain of Functions,
my goal is to adjust instructional practices to increase student achievement
of the summative unit Functions assessment. To accomplish this, I will focus
on differentiating materials to scaffold supports for students, as well as
implement instructional routines to engage and allow students to work with
peers to negotiate meaning.

Impact Student Learning 2

Purpose
Achievement on standardized testing in mathematics continues to be a
main focus in education. The transition into the new Common Core State
Standards require students attaining proficiency in mathematics to:
Make sense of problems and

Use appropriate tools

persevere in solving them

strategically
Reason abstractly and quantitatively Attend to precision
Construct viable arguments and
Look for and make use of structure
Look for and express regularity in
critique the reasoning of others
Model with mathematics
repeated reasoning

These skills can be challenging for all learners, as well as ELLs due to many
factors, such as low economic status, emotional and behavioral issues, and
comprehension of written and spoken English language. These limitations
can create barriers to understanding the mathematical task, as well as
illustrate the Standards of Mathematical Practice (SMPs) that are listed
above. With the help of a Practicum Supervisor from Salem State University
and Supervising Practitioner, I identified an instructional focus of improving
my adjustments to practice in order to increase student achievement. To
increase student achievement, scaffolded supports were implemented in the
design phase of the lessons, as well as explicit instructional routines aimed
to allow students to negotiate meaning and content of the 8th grade
mathematical tasks they were presented. Through use of key visuals, a
modified Think-Pair-Share routine, and use of technology to garner
engagement, students of all levels can make progress in relation to the CCSS
listed below:
8.F.1 Understand that a function is a rule that assigns to each input exactly
one output. The graph of a function is the set of ordered pairs consisting of
an input and the corresponding output.
8.F.5 Describe qualitatively the functional relationship between two
quantities by analyzing a graph (e.g., where the function is increasing or
decreasing, linear or nonlinear). Sketch a graph that exhibits the qualitative
features of a function that has been described verbally.
Demographics of Participants
At my school, which is in the outer urban suburb north of Boston, there
is a total enrollment of 526 students serving grades six through eight. Of
this population, 51.9% of the student population identify as Hispanic, as well
as live in a home where English is not the primary language. The population

of my school contains an 11.2% English Language Learner population, as

well as 24% of all students at our Middle School are learning disabled (which
is 2% higher than than median across all middle schools in Massachusetts.)
Finally, in terms of economically disadvantageous students, 81.9% of the
population qualify for free/reduced lunch.
The class in which I am measuring my effect on student learning is
made up of a diverse group of 14 students including ELL, Formerly Limited
English Proficient (FLEP), and students on a 504 plan. Of the seven ELLs, two
are identified as WIDA level four, two students were identified as WIDA level
three, one student is a WIDA level two, and two newly arrived students (as of
2016) are WIDA level one according to the WIDA ELP standards and ACCESS
testing. Two other students are FLEP, as of 2014, and the rest of the class is
made up of a diverse population of college readiness track students.

Pre-Assessment
To begin the Functions unit, students were given a 10 question
assessment consisting of multiple choice and a short answer/open response
type, similar to what they will see on the post-assessment. Since
mathematics is a content in which is very cumulative, students may be able
to use previous 8th grade skills, as well as 6th and 7th grade skills in order to
reason through the questions. Students were given five multiple choice
questions based on CCSS 8.F.1, in which they had to apply knowledge of the
definition of a function. ELL students of WIDA level one and two, were given
a modified version in which they had to choose which representation (table,
graph, relation) was a function. This was modified from the original version

in which students had to read mathematical language to decipher what the

question was being asked. The results for this pre-assessment are shown in
Appendix A.
Similarly, students were given four multiple choices and one short
answer/open response question to demonstrate their understanding pre
intervention of CCSS 8.F.5. Students were given verbal descriptions of an
event of a person or animal in which they had to match which graph best
represented the story being given. Alternatively, one of the multiple choice
questions asked students to match which story best represented the one
graph they were given. Lastly, students were given a story consisting of five
events, in which they had to draw the graph that matched the story. Here,
students had the ability to rely on their previous work and understanding of
analyzing graphs to keywords in the story. The results are shown in
Appendix B.
Intervention
Upon delivering the lessons (outlined below), I attempted to provide
multiple opportunities for students to understand meaning while integrating
scaffolded supports, attempt a challenging problem individual, as well as
build in practice time for them to negotiate meaning and understanding with
a peer, before discussing the solution as a class. Thus, students were given
supports of visuals, scaffolded supports at the design stage (modified
language and sentence frames), as well as integrating an instructional
routine meant to allow students to work together to comprehend meaning
and content.
The goal of the two week lesson was for students to be able define
functions through different representations, analyze graphs to answer
mathematical questions, and ultimately sketch graphs that have been

described qualitatively. After students had a period to complete the preassessment, students were explicitly taught the definition of a function using
a metaphor and corresponding visuals of a vending machine. If you input a
code, you get a unique output; for example pushing A results in a sports
drink. What makes a function, not a
function is when a particular input A
results in two different outputs, (i.e.
sports drink and then water). Through
this illustration animation (pictured to
the right), students discussed the
interpretation of a function, and its connection to mathematical
representations. Students then worked the rest of the period and the day
after working through practice problems in different representations (verbal
descriptions, input/output tables, graphs, and a set of coordinates). Native
speakers were given CCSS aligned problems with technical language, while
students of WIDA levels three and four were given the same problems with
keywords bolded and underlined. Finally, students identified as WIDA level
one and two were asked to circle the representations that were functions.
The following days, days 4, 5, and 6 were all spent analyzing graphs
using keywords, such as increasing, decreasing, and constant. To do this,
students each day were given a problem that was represented by a graph,
and had to answer a series of questions. The first day, students names were
inserted into a graph to engage students about a bike race, as shown to the
right. Students worked in groups, negotiating meaning of each question, and
then shared their ideas about key questions, such as who won the race, who
stopped to take a break, and who traveled the farthest distance. All students
were given sentence frames, while WIDA level one and two students were

given scaffolded questions before sentence frames to support the writing.

Following the group work, students were led in a whole group discussion
about the answers, asking questions and
answering their peers questions. The
following two days, students were led in
through similar routine as they practiced
on the following two problems:

Each night, students were

given five multiple choice practice problems to reinforce the skills of
analyzing graphs, each time paying attention to increasing, decreasing,
and constant lines in the graphs, and what they represent in context of the
problem.

Following these lessons, students were moved on until the last of the three
skills, which was being presented with a story of a sequence of events and
they must informally sketch
a graph that corresponds to
the given verbal description.
This can be a challenging
task for a native speaker,
which due to the language
demands can be even more
rigorous for an ELL.
To begin this two day lesson, students read about Billy (another name
of a classmate) and his heart rate as he does several exercises, as well as a
cool-down walk. To create a clear understanding of this example, I would
model the key events (similar to a Total Physical Response activity) of the
story, such as performing warm-up exercises (jumping jacks, stretching,
etc.), maintaining a steady heart rate (jogging), and slowing down a heart
rate (walking). To follow, we underline the three major events and decide to
have three parts to the graph. Using keywords from previous lessons, we
created the graph together, followed by taking notes of key components to
sketching graphs. Following this, students will be led through a guided
discussion of a second example about a fellow students trip to the library
where there are five key events. Students will be led through discussion
based on their previously recorded notes, and using the first example as a
model.
Following this, students were introduced to the Practice! portion of
class where they are asked to work through three to four additional problems
based on the skill from the previous two examples. Students are given five

to seven minutes to practice independently before being allowed to discuss

their answers with a partner. Finally, students will be given the solutions
before reflecting on their progress and understanding as a (Ticket to Leave)
summarizer.
The following day, students arrive to class given a description of a
student running across a field at recess. Students spend the first five to
seven minutes of class creating/sketching a graph of Morys distance from
the starting point as a function of time. This will serve as the students First
Try - Independent part of the worksheet. Students will then be shown
(pausing at each different interval) the following YouTube video
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBs73jjfR14) and asked to try to sketch
a graph again with a partner, the Second Try - Partner. Finally, students
will be shown the second version of the video (0:38 to end) where students
which has the graph superimposed on the video as the Third Try - Whole
Class, as well as the solution.

After a discussion on the

resources that were used, as well as the results (each try getting closer to
the correct answer), students engaged in a similar routine for a conceptual
math task that asks students to sketch graphs of two different shaped
swimming pools being filled with a constant stream of water. To end the
instruction students were then given review day where they worked through

a number of problems and tasks aligned to the two standards before taking
the post-assessment the following day.
Conclusion
Several strategies and supports were implemented in the intervention
stage to increase student achievement in relation to the Function standards
for 8th grade mathematics, specifically 8.F.1 and 8.F.5. Based upon the data
illustrated in Appendix A, there was a 31.5% growth in achievement from
pre-assessment to post-assessment specifically tied to the 8.F.1 standard.
This high percentage tends to imply that the visuals provided and scaffolded
practice questions were effective across all learners. The lowest percentage
of any student in this standard was Student 11, who is a WIDA level one
student. Based on this information, it is fair to state that even this student
made significant progress and benefited from the visuals, as well as group
work where students of higher levels were able to assist them with language
support.
As shown in Appendix B, the results for standard 8.F.5 were not as
successful as they were for the previous standard. There are many
contributing factors to this drop off in student achievement. In comparison,
this particular standard involves many higher order thinking skills, and
involves many of the higher tiers of Blooms taxonomy (pictured right), such
as apply, analyze, evaluate, and create. The standard of 8.F.1 primarily
focuses on lower level skills such as understand and remembering. Students
in this class can be described as low level learners, based upon previous
grading from earlier years, which tends to suggest they have a harder time
once being asked to demonstrate higher order thinking skills. Additionally,
the modified Think-Pair-Share instructional routine led to some disengaged
students because the skill and questions were critical thinking tasks. This

may have lead students to disengage, as they may have felt they had little
to nothing to contribute to the discussion. Thus, the routine may have not
be as effective as modeling and use of visuals. Although the video math
problem led to an increase in
engagement with students, I believe
the complexity of the task led to
students feeling frustrated, and thus
a barrier to their learning.
In the future, I would implement sentence frames for students who do
not know how to engage in such high levels of conversation. For example, a
sentence frame that could be included in the Video Math Problem may have
been, I chose to draw the third increasing line steepest because This
would provide students with a suggestion as to how they can discuss their
choices with their partner while not having to worry about the proper
mathematical language expected. Although there were a number of
successes, the two major successes that I will continue to utilize moving
forward, as well as make some enhancements as previously stated, are
utilizing the protocol for complicated tasks, as well as engaging students by
implementing their names in problems, and using multimedia videos where
appropriate. Doing this, as well as continuously reflecting on my work can
and will lead to increase student achievement as well an increase in student
learning.

APPENDIX A
Standard

% Correct on

% Correct on

8.F.1

5 Pre-

5 Post-

Change

Assessment

Assessment

Questions

Questions

Student 1

20%

80%

+60%

ELL
Student 2

20%

100%

+80%

Student 3

40%

80%

+40%

Student 4

40%

80%

+40%

ELL
Student 5

40%

100%

+60%

Student 6

40%

80%

+40%

Student 7

60%

80%

+20%

Student 8

20%

80%

+60%

ELL
Student 9

20%

100%

+80%

Student 10

60%

100%

+40%

ELL
Student 11

0%

60%

+60%

ELL
Student 12

80%

100%

+20%

Student 13

80%

80%

+0%

ELL
Student 14

80%

100%

+20%

ELL
Total Class

42.8%

74.3%

+31.5%

APPENDIX B

Standard

% Correct on

% Correct on

8.F.5

5 Pre-

5 Post-

Change

Assessment

Assessment

Student 1

Questions
40%

Questions
60%

+20%

ELL
Student 2

60%

100%

+40%

Student 3

40%

80%

+40%

Student 4

40%

60%

+20%

ELL
Student 5

40%

60%

+20%

Student 6

60%

60%

+0%

Student 7

60%

60%

+0%

Student 8

20%

40%

+20%

ELL
Student 9

40%

40%

+0%

Student 10

60%

60%

+0%

ELL
Student 11

40%

60%

+20%

ELL
Student 12

20%

40%

+20%

Student 13

40%

60%

+20%

ELL
Student 14

60%

60%

+0%

ELL
Total Class

44.3%

60%

+15.7%