DATA ANALYSIS/HOW DID
COLLECTED/ACTION
TAKEN
Data Collected: Formative-
Student picked partners sheets
Formative-Observation Notes
from 10/2/18
Action taken/Teaching
Strategy: My CT and I looked
over the partner choices that
students wrote down. We then
tried to pair them with someone
they wrote down and also sit
them next to someone they wrote
down.
The observation notes helped
me observe and compare if
students are discussing the
mathematics more with the
partners that they picked or with
the partners that their teacher
picked. The teaching strategy
that I implemented through these
notes is more higher order
thinking questions.
Literature:
Striking the Right Balance:
Students’ Motivation and Affect
in Elementary Mathematics
“Students' reported classroom
experiences formed 4 factors—
Social Affect, Personal Affect,
Efficacy, and
Challenge/Importance. On the
basis of student reports, the
authors concluded that (a) affect
is essential to student experience
in mathematics lessons, (b) skill
is perceived in conjunction with
affective variables, (c) challenge
is identified as a threat to
students' efficacy, and (d)
importance of a task is more
FINDING FROM THIS
YOU MAKE SENSE OF DATA & NEXT STEPS
THE DATA?
This observation notes and
student picked partner sheets
showed me which students
work best together. The
student picked partner sheets
show me who students
believe they work best with
and who motivates them the
most. The observation notes
show me how students are
communicating with each
other and also if students are
communicating more now
than they were at the
beginning of the year with
their teacher-picked partners.
One student, G.B.,seemed to
be communicating with his
partner more and also
explaining the mathematics
to his partner.
Pairing students together
was an effective strategy.
From my observation
notes, I gathered that they
were communicating more
and they were explaining
their thoughts more when
discussing math. The next
step is to look at the test
scores from when they
were first switched. This
would be their test scores
over ratios and also their
quarterly test scores.
According to our ESOL
course, ELL’s tend to
work better in small
groups and with someone
who can explain the
content to them well. The
next step for this is to see
how G.B. does with his
partner, J.M., that he
picked rather than with a
teacher-picked partner.
Diaz-Rico, L. T., & Weed,
K. Z. (2002). The
crosscultural, language,
and academic development
handbook: A complete K-
12 reference guide.
Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
relevant to motivation than is its
challenge.”

Amy Schweinle, Debra K. Meyer

& Julianne C.
Turner (2006) Striking the Right
Balance: Students' Motivation
and Affect in Elementary
Mathematics, The Journal of
Educational Research, 99:5, 271-
294.

This data showed me that The next step for this is to

Data Collected: Quarterly when students pick their move my students into
Check 1 Percentage G.B. = 93% partners, they do better on seats where the teachers
Class Average= 82% their tests, even big ones like pick the partners. This is
District Average= 80% quarterly tests. This shows testing what we know
that G.B., who is an ELL about ELL students
Action Taken/Teaching student did better than his working better in small
Strategy: class, which scored an 82% groups and with people
When looking at this, my CT and average. It also showed me they are comfortable with.
I decided to keep the seats the that the class, as a whole, This will also help us see
same. This showed that having benefited from student how students do on tests
students pick their partners picked partners because they when they do not get to
improved their learning from the scored higher than the district pick their shoulder partner
time that they chose their average. to have discussions with.
partners to the time that we
moved their seats.

Literature: “The low-achieving

students given learning-goal Diaz-Rico, L. T., & Weed,
instructions performed better on K. Z. (2002). The
the posttest problems and crosscultural, language,
perceived their partner's and academic development
competence as more similar to handbook: A complete K-
their own than did the low- 12 reference guide.
achieving students given Boston, MA: Allyn and
performance-goal instructions.” Bacon.

Gabriele, Anthrony J. &

Montecinos, Carmen
(2001) Collaborating With a
Skilled Peer: The Influence of
Achievement Goals and
Perceptions of Partners'
Competence on the Participation
and Learning of Low-Achieving
Students, The Journal of
Experimental
Education, 69:2, 152-178.
Data Collected: Quiz scores
from most recent test
G.B.= 81.5%
Class Average= 92.11%
Action Taken/Teaching
Strategy: For this teaching
strategy, we moved the students
to teacher-picked partners to see
how the students would do on
assignments if they did not pick
their partners.
Literature: “Students in the
structured conditions reported
higher levels of scholastic
competency and self-control than
did students in the nonstructured
conditions.”
Fantuzzo, John W., King, Judith
A., Heller, Lauren R. (1992).
Effects of Reciprocal Peer
Tutoring on Mathematics and
School Adjustment: A
Component Analysis, The
Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84:3, 331-339.
While this article does not
support the data that was
collected, this shows me that
the my ESOL student tends
to do worse when we pick his
partners for him rather than
when he picks them for
himself. This data supports
my belief that students tend
to do better when they get to
pick their own partners rather
than when the teacher picks
them.
In our ESOL class, we
learned that students tend
to work better when they
get to do what they want
and get to have some say
in their learning and their
learning environment. The
next step for this is to start
incorporating more
student-picked partners
into the classroom.
Diaz-Rico, L. T., & Weed,
K. Z. (2002). The
crosscultural, language,
and academic development
handbook: A complete K-
12 reference guide.
Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.