Paige Kearnan

Math 3224-001

IMB Clinical Reflection

After my observations of two 3rd grade math lessons, I feel more confident and
prepared to teach my own math lessons as I approach my student teaching semester.
Overall I feel I learned several teaching techniques from my clinical teacher that I would
love to utilize in my future classroom as well as several teaching techniques I would like
to avoid also. One of the techniques my teacher used that I would take away from my
observations is using math centers. I felt the math centers were a great way to allow
students to explore the math on their own. The centers were also a great way to allow
students to work out math concepts with their peers. A technique I would try to avoid
when in my future classroom is having the students solve math word problems in their
books without any discussion or check for understanding following. My clinical teacher
utilized the time the students were completing their work in their books to finish
grading papers or preparing for another lesson. I felt as though she could have spent
this time walking around answering questions and checking for understanding.

In my two weeks of being in the classroom, I observed two full math lessons. For
the first lesson, the goal for my clinical teacher was to continue her instruction with
place value and have students learn how utilize place value to compare numbers. The
standard my clinical teacher addressed was, 4.NBT.A I will understand the relationship
of place value in numbers and demonstrate that understanding my comparing
numbers. For the second lesson, the goal of the lesson was to have students practice
making equal groups and drawing arrays for multiplication and division problems. The
standard addressed in this lesson was, 3.OA.1-4 I will use equal groups and arrays to
solve multiplication and division equations.

Before the each lesson even began, my teacher had students complete a Mad
Minute. A Mad Minute is a mini quiz for students to practice the multiplication facts for
each number. The students immediately seemed to appear nervous and quiet before
each sheet was passed out. I did not enjoy seeing the stress the math test caused the
students. And because the Mad Minute was done at the beginning of the math lesson,
the students did not appear to be excited about learning math following the mini quiz.
As we discussed in my math methods course, time testing can negatively affect a
students attitude towards math. Time testing can cause math anxiety and can
therefore take away the excitement of learning math altogether. In my future
classroom, if I am able to avoid time testing, I definitely will. Alternatives to time
testing to promote number sense and fluency are just having students practice their
math facts without timing them. This will reduce the stress of having to rapidly list
math facts and allow students to list what they know at their own pace. To introduce
the first lesson, my clinical teacher spent ten minutes going over place value
comparison problems from the previous math lesson in their Envision books. The
students were able to see their mistakes and correct them as the teacher went over
them. During the second lesson I observed, my clinical teacher spent ten minutes going
over commonly missed homework problems from the night before. For both lessons, I
feel my clinical teacher did effectively activate students prior knowledge by going over
problems the students struggled with. However I did not feel my clinical teacher did a
good job at engaging the students in the beginning of the two lessons.

The first lesson I observed my clinical teacher did not require any exploration of
the mathematics. The teacher went over place value comparison problems on the
SmartBoard and the students followed along as she asked questions. The major tasks
posed to the students were to complete a page out of their Envision books at the end of
the lesson. During the second lesson, my clinical teacher allowed for exploration of
arrays and equal group word problems during math centers. My teacher split the class
into five equal groups. Each group was tasked with a different activity or set of
problems to solve. I was in charge of leading the teacher math center group. The math
centers were the major tasks of the lesson. Students spend around fifteen minutes
exploring in small group math centers.

During the first lesson, my clinical teacher did not include any math strategies
such as an anchor chart or graphic organizer to help with place value. The teacher
simply went over comparison problems and drew the less than, greater than, and equal
to symbols on the board when a student struggled with one of the problems. For the
second lesson I observed, the teacher went over the two ways students can
demonstrate a multiplication and division problem by drawing an equal groups example
problem and by drawing an array example problem on the SmartBoard. The students
were then able to utilize the two examples to help them when they began their
centers. The teacher also utilized cube manipulatives for a two of the five math
centers to help give students a visual of the problem they were solving.

For the discussions in each of my observations, the teacher guided students

asking closed questions by asking for the answers to certain problems. My clinical
teacher used Popsicle sticks to randomize the student responses. I observed no open
ended or exploratory questions being asked. The discussions were teacher led rather
than having students lead the discussion. The students in both of the lessons were not
asked to explain their reasoning but rather were simply asked to state their answer. If
students were asked to explain their reasoning I feel it would have given my clinical
teacher a greater understanding of what the students did not comprehend.
 For my initial observation, I did engage with a few students when they were
completing problems in their Envision books. Because there was no small group
instruction during this lesson I was not able to interact with more than one student at a
time. The second lesson I observed, the teacher had students complete math centers.
For the teacher led math center, my clinical teacher allowed me to work with five
students to help go over a few word problems. She let me know this at the beginning of
the lesson so I could have ten minutes to look over the problems myself and understand
how to teach them. For each of the problems, the students were asked to solve the
problem by finding the fact families and drawing an array for one of the fact families.
Before the math centers began, I quickly wrote down all of the different fact families for
each of the problems to ensure that each student also wrote down all possibilities for
the number. I had the students draw their arrays on the table using white erase markers
to help them visually before they drew their final array on their paper. I went over all of
the possible arrays with them and drew any fact family arrays they had overlooked.

For the two lessons, I did not observe any common misconceptions about the
mathematics. Because the two lessons I observed were the third or fourth days of
lessons on the standard, I feel the misconceptions had already been addressed in the
prior lessons. If I had I observed the first lesson on the standard, I likely would have seen
common mathematical misconceptions on each of the standards being addressed.

Based on what I observed in the two lessons, the students needed more time
exploring the math in the lesson rather than jumping straight to the practice portion
of the lesson. As I walked around and interacted with several students, I observed
mostly mastery of the content being taught in both lessons. A few students struggled
with the distinction between the greater than and less than symbols. For example, one
student did not know the word associated with the symbol. Another student was
unsure when to use each symbol in problems. This is where as a teacher I would stop to
provide a strategy to help these students understand the difference between the
symbols. The strategy/technique I would have taught to help students understand the
distinction between the two symbols is the greater than symbol always eats the bigger
number. An example would be 99 is less than, equal to, or greater than 89? The
student knows 99 is greater than 89 and would therefore say the sign should eat the
99. The problem would be written as 99 > 89 and the student would then remember 99
is greater than 89. After clarifying and discussing a few of the commonly missed
problems I feel the students in each of the lessons were capable of moving on to more
difficult content.