Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Math Sprint Tutorial Boosts 6th Grade Test Scores
Semelhante a Math Sprint Tutorial Boosts 6th Grade Test Scores (20)
Último
Último (20)
Math Sprint Tutorial Boosts 6th Grade Test Scores
- 1. The Use of Math Sprint in a Tutorial Program For Sixth Grade Students to Improve End of Grade Test Scores
- 2. Mathematics Education Team Ms. Dalesha Cartman Mr. Sean Leavy Mr. Marvin Elder II JR-Math/ Math Ed JR-Math/ Math Ed JR-Mathematics Mr. Kaiem Frink Dr. Darnell Johnson Mr. Brian Jordan Assistant Team Mentor Team Mentor Assistant Team Mentor
- 3. Abstract The Use of the Math Sprint in a Tutorial Program for Sixth Grade Students to Improve End of Grade Test Scores Key Words: Algebra, Combinatorial Mathematics, Tree Graphs, Estimation, Geometry, Probability, Statistics, Transformations What is the effect of a math sprint tutorial model on Mathematics achievement of sixth graders at Elizabeth City Middle School in Elizabeth City, North Carolina? A math sprint tutorial process was used during a three-week study with a group of 10 six- grade students to increase test scores from the previous 2011 Spring end of grade (EOG) test. The data, gathered from the post-test as a result of the series of tutoring sessions, was compared with the scores from the 2011 Spring EOG. Research studied the improvements made in scores on the North Carolina Mathematics state test.
- 4. Introduction The North Carolina Mathematics Standard Course of Study provides a set of • Mathematical Competencies • Organization • Number and Operations • Measurement • Geometry • Data Analysis and Probability • Algebra
- 5. Elizabeth City Middle School "Home of the Mighty Yellow Jackets" 1066 Northside Road Elizabeth City, NC 27909 Mission: “ECMS”: Where Every Child Meets Success Theme: We are Family ECMS is a learning institution with highly skilled professionals who place our community children as our top priority. Our administration, classroom teachers, and support staff are committed to making sure that each student is provided with the best possible education because at ECMS: Every Child Meets Success Website: http://www.ecpps.k12.nc.us/ECMS/index.html
- 6. ECMS (cont)
- 7. ECMS (cont) Performance School Term
- 8. Math Sprint Facilitator: Dr. Linda Hayden-ECSU Principles: Completing problems in a timed environment Receive points for correct answers Lose points for incorrect answers Motivator: Helps students develop better learning and cooperative skills
- 9. Attendance Days Present from June 14 – July 1 16 14 12 Days Attended 10 8 Days Present 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Student
- 10. Pedagogy Classroom Management- Teaching Philosophy • Assertive Discipline (Mr. Elder) • Preventative Discipline (Mr. Leavy) • Assertive and Preventative Discipline (Ms. Cartman)
- 11. Bloom’s Taxonomy • Benjamin Bloom • Common Core • North Carolina Standards of Mathematics • Metacognitive Processes
- 12. Pedagogy Classroom Alignment The following is an example of the typical procedure followed for a tutoring session: (10 am- noon) Welcome/ Warm- Up Intro to New Lesson & Practice 10 minute Break Continue with Lesson & Practice (Hands-on Activity) Math Sprint* (only 2 sessions) 15 minute Snack break/ Dismissal
- 13. Observations Problems • Background Knowledge • Classroom Challenges • Material • Attendance • Class Size
- 14. Math Sprint • Administration: 2 Sessions • 1: Week 2 • 2: Week 3 • Used to motivate students
- 15. Math Sprint: How It Works • Sense of TEAMWORK through Competition • 3 Key Instructors • Score Keeper • Timer • Facilitator
- 16. Math Sprint - Implementation • Session 1 • Groups • Reward System • EOG questions • Session 2 • Groups • Reward System • EOG (short answer)
- 17. Data Data that was analyzed: • 2011 Spring EOG Score • Diagnostic Exam Score (raw) • Released EOG Score (raw) Diagnostic Exam: • Developed by the Math Education Team, modeled after EOG exam • 30 questions (20 calculator, 10 w/o calculator)
- 18. Data Released EOG Exam: • Taken from the North Carolina Department of Education • Available Online (with full answer key) • 50 questions (36 calculator, 14 without calculator) Spring EOG Exam: • Scaled scores received • Scores 342 – 350 (level 2)
- 19. Results-Diagnostic (6/14/11) Competency Passing Rate 60 50 Breakdown of performance of the 5 competencies Passing Rate (%) 40 13 30 Students 10 Students 20 Baseline for curriculum alignment 10 0 Comp 1: Comp 2: Comp 3: Comp 4: Comp 5: (5) (4) (3) (4) (5) Competency (number of questions on exam)
- 20. Results-Diagnostic Exam vs. EOG Exam Diagnostic Exam vs. EOG Exam 60% Displays results of Diagnostic Exam 50% compared to EOG Exam Exam Grade (Percent) 40% 30% Diagnostic Exam 20% EOG Exam 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Student
- 21. Results-Spring VS. Released EOG Baseline score of 342 (level 2) was assigned for the students’ Spring 2011 scores Spring Scores (%) vs. End EOG Scores (%) 60% 50% 40% Spring Percent Scores 30% EOG Exam 20% 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Student
- 22. Results-Spring VS. Released EOG Peak score of 350 (level 2) was assigned for the students’ Spring 2011 scores Spring Scores (%) vs. End EOG Scores (%) 60% 50% 40% Percent Spring 30% Scores EOG 20% Exam 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Student
- 23. Conclusion Exams Vs. Student Scores • Overall growth through weeks • 50% 45% Individual Scores 40% 35% • Attendance • Math Sprint Score (%) 30% 25% EOG Exam 20% Increase and Decrease of Students Scores Before EOG 15 15% Exam 10% 10 Percent Change 5% 5 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -5 Exam -10 Student
- 24. Future Work • A longer period of study (9 weeks) • Student Population Size (at least 20) • Requirement: Students’ EOG exam scores Attendance • Keep “hands-on” approach with Math Sprint • Parent Participation
- 25. Acknowledgements We would like to thank: •Mr. Brian Jordan- Data Analyst for the Office of Institutional Research for technical assistance (consultation). •Mr. Kaiem Frink- For his upkeep and safety of students’ records. •Dr. Darnell Johnson- For affording the team with the guidance to conduct this research. •Dr. Linda Hayden- Principal Investigator of the URE OMPS Summer Program at Elizabeth City State University. •NOAA, NASA, CReSIS, CERSER, and ECSU- For their sponsorship.
- 26. References [1]Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [2]Begle, E. (1979). Critical variables in mathematics education: Findings from a survey of empirical literature. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America. [3]Education Week. (1997). Quality counts: A report card on the condition of public education in the 50 states. A Supplement to Education Week, Vol. 16, January, 22. [4]Linn, R. L., Dunbar, S. B., Harnisch, D. L., & Hastings, C. N. (1982). The validity of the Title I evaluation and reporting system. In E. R. House, S. Mathison, J. Pearsol, & H. Preskill (Eds.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual (Vol. 7, pp. 427-442). Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. [5]Linn, R. L., Graue, M. E., & Sanders, N. M. (1990). Comparing state and district results to national norms: The validity of the claims that “everyone is above average.” EducationalMeasurement: Issues and Practice, 9(3), 5-14. [6]Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [7]Monk, D. A. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2), 125-145. [8]Moore, D. S. & McCabe, G. (1999). Introduction to the practice of statistics. New York: Freeman. [9]Shaughnessy, M. (1992). Research in probability and statistics: Reflections and directions. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 465-494). New York: Macmillan Publishing. [10]Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. [12]Siu, M. K. (1991). Concept of function---its history and teaching. In F. Swetz et al. (Eds), Learn from the masters (pp. 105-121). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America. [13]Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta- analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21-51.
- 27. Questions?
Notas do Editor
- Greetings everyone, (introduce yourself individually) and we are the Summer 2011 Mathematics Team here at Elizabeth City State University. The title of our research is The Use of Math Sprint in a Tutorial Program for Sixth Grade Students to improve End of Grade Test Scores
- On the second row, you can see our team mentors. On the far left, there is Mr. KaiemFrink, in the middle, we have our lead mentor Dr. Darnell Johnson, and on the far right side Mr. Brian Jordan team consultant.
- Read abstract as is….
- Before tutoring sessions began, independent study was focused on The North Carolina Mathematics Standard Course of Study. It is organized in 5 competencies. (Read competencies) These competencies are supposed to be taught and they form the End of Grade Exams that NC public schools administer. Comp 1: The learner will understand & compute with rational numbers.Comp 2: The learner will select and use appropriate tools to measure two- and three-dimensional figures.Comp 3: The learner will understand and use properties and relationships of geometric figures in the coordinate plane.Comp 4: The learner will understand and determine probabilities.Comp 5: The learner will demonstrate an understanding of simple algebraic expressions.
- The test subjects for our research came from 6th graders at Elizabeth City Middle School, which is 10.6 miles from here. This school is a part of the Elizabeth City-Pasquotank Public School District. Their website is seen at the bottom of the screen.
- This screen before you is an actual image of the school’s report card. Based on the Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP, which is a measurement defined by the United States federal No Child Left Behind Act that allows the U.S. Department of Education to determine how every public school and school district in the country is performing academically according to results on standardized tests. AYP for the 2010 academic year was not met.
- A record of attendance was kept during the 3-week tutoring sessions, which began on June 14 and ended July 1, 2011During the academic year, the principal and the child’s teacher will notify parents and take all the necessary steps required by the Compulsory Attendance Law (G.S. 115C-378) for excessive absences.
- Assertive discipline is an approach to classroom management developed by Lee and Marlene Canter. It involves a high level of teacher control in the class. It is also called the "take-control" approach to teaching, as the teacher controls their classroom in a firm but positive manner.
- The New Essential Standards are written using the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT) under the guidance of one of the authors of the revision, Lorin Anderson. North Carolina has chosen RBT to help move to the complex thinking expected from 21st Century graduates. The RBT was chosen because it has well-defined verbs and is built on modern cognitive research. When students share their own solution methods they are required to make their thinking clear and explicit so their classmates will understand them. When they have to listen to their classmates' methods and restate their friends' thinking in their own words they learn how to listen to and learn from each other.
- In the classroom, a multi-media techniques was implemented to instruct the students. Standard practice using dry-erase boards as well as the chalk board in the classroom was combined with power-point presentations to appeal to the different learning styles of the students in the classroom.
- First group: WinnerSecond group: AttemptedThird Group: Attempted to cheat, and just circled answers, no team work to find correct response
- Problems and times are mirrored to reflect the intensity of the curriculum. They align to previous and current lessons without pushing the students boundaries on what they understand. The questions, like the test mirror what they are being taught.
- First: Diligent, fast, and correctSecond: Working and correctThird: Completed 1 problem in seven minutes
- The percent of the exam that was passed with all the students was 37.2%, the passing percent of the ten students that took the final was 39.33%. As the graph shows students struggled in understanding comp 2 and 4 more than 1, 3 and 5.
- The final test showed some improvement in the students’ scores individually as well as a whole. Though some students’ score were in the same range as their diagnostic test, a couple of students made sum dramatic improvements. As the purple graph shows with math sprint as a method of curriculum alignment, scores have increased over the three week period. Out of the 10 students only 1 had a decrease in performance, while one student rose as much as 13 %
- the graphs above compares their spring score (scaled with 342) to the EOG release exam they took at the end of the program. This graphs display a strong increase in scores from every student in the program by as much as more than 20% (as demonstrated in the green graph on the right). This rate of increase, also resulted from only 3 of the competencies being covered in the time period granted for the study
- the graphs above compares their spring score (scaled with 342) to the EOG release exam they took at the end of the program. This graphs display a strong increase in scores from every student in the program by as much as more than 20% (as demonstrated in the green graph on the right). This rate of increase, also resulted from only 3 of the competencies being covered in the time period granted for the study
- Overall, the students EOG release exam was an increase from their diagnostic and their EOG exam by 2% or more, even wit the two average scores from the EOG exam.
- One error was the scores from the spring exam. Some scores were not reported with the raw value, so they were assigned the value of 350 and 342 so results could be calculated and compared. Based on their level II or III score from a level IV scale. With II and III being one of the lowest.