Pre-Assessment

The class at the time had just finished Chapter 9 in the My Math Program. This program
offers material for students to use in class and for the teacher to teach with. It also offers tools for
instruction that the educator can use using digital media such as a SMART board. By using this
support material, lessons are already planned but can be manipulated or modified based on the
needs of the teachers and students.
The My Math Program by McGraw-Hill uses the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
to guide the organization and scheduling of lessons. Chapter 10 would help the students to meet
the requirements for the CCSS for the fifth grade. At the end of this chapter the students should
know how to multiply a whole number and a fraction; use models to multiply; be able to
multiply fractions without using models; how to solve word problems involving mixed numbers;
how to divide a whole number by a unit fraction; and divide a fraction by a whole number. The
data on learning would be collected using a pre-test to determine the students base-line
knowledge of this material. This would be compared to the post test to find out the amount of
growth the students have gained. Although the over-all purpose is to ensure that the students are
prepared to move forward into their academic develop, I will be using the data to assess my
ability to teach this subject matter.
In correlating with my mentor, she was concerned about using the same pre-test as she
would use as the post test. She felt that she would not be able to get the data she needed if we
gave them a preview of the final assessment. The My Math Program offers an A and B test that
use the same question types and formats as each other but using different sets of number
combinations. To support her concern we agreed that I would use test form 1B as the pre-test
assessment and 1A as our post assessment. Both tests used 11 questions that would test the
knowledge of student to what they needed to know by the end of Chapter 10. Each question on

both tests also used multiple choice giving the students a choice of 1 correct answer and 3
incorrect answers to compare and choose from.
I decided to spring the pre-test of Chapter 10 on the students early in the morning March
2, 2015. It was a beautiful morning and the students had just come into the class and settled in
for the day. After allowing them time to do their morning work, I told them about the pre-test. I
also shared with them that this test is only a tool to let me see what they know. I also expressed
that they should do their best and if they come across a problem they just did not understand, to
simply put a question (?) mark. They were also instructed to use their "blockers" (partitions they
made from manila folders to create a work space for testing to give them privacy and avoid
looking on others test sheets). I felt it important that they also have all the time they needed and
expressed this, however after 15 minutes all of the students had completed the test.
The next chart will show a break-down of the pre-test by question and its correct answer,
along with the purpose of the question. The problems will be written out for the break-down,
however the students tests are available in appendix A to compare with and authenticate the
questions actual mathematical arrangements.
Pre-test (1B)-The left column will indicate the math question to be answered. The center column
indicates the correct answer by its associated letter and numerical answer. The right column will
identify what CCSS that this question is testing.
1. 4 times 2/5ths equals
A. 1 and 3/5ths
multiply a whole number and
a fraction
2. 2/7ths times 8 equals
H. 2 and 2/7ths
multiply a whole number and
a fraction
3. 5 times 2/9ths equals
C. 1 and 1/9ths
multiply a whole number and
a fraction
4. 3/4ths times 2/3rds equals
I. 1/2 (one-half)
multiply fractions without
using models
5. 2 and 3/5ths times 1 and 12/13ths equals A. 5
multiply fractions without
using models
6. 2 and 1/6ths times 3 and 2/3rds equals
F. 7 and 17/18ths multiply fractions without
using models
Questions 7 to 11 have a bar graph attached to each. The bar graphs are separated according to
the largest denominator in the problem. The students are to use the bar graphs to help them in
solving each equation. Each are division problems with numbers 10 and 11 written as word

problems. (Refer to Appendix A correlate with this break-down)

7. 3 divided by 1/3rd equals
B. 9
divide a whole number by a
unit fraction; use models to
multiply
8. 1/2 (one-half) divided by 6 equals
F. 1/12th
divide a fraction by a whole
number; use models to
multiply
9. 1/5th divided by 2 equals
B. 1/10th
divide a fraction by a whole
number; use models to
multiply
10. Amanda has 5 pounds of raisins to divide
I. 20 bags
solve word problems
equally into 1/4ths pound bags. How many bags can
involving mixed numbers;
she fill? Find the unknown in 5 divided by 1/4th
divide a whole number by a
equals t.
unit fraction; use models to
multiply
11. There is 1/7th of a birthday cake left over. If 4
A. 1/28ths
solve word problems
friends share it equally, what fraction of the entire
involving mixed numbers;
cake will each friend receive? Find the unknown in
divide a fraction by a whole
1/7th divided by 4 equals c.
number; use models to
multiply
source: Appendix B
For the purpose of confidentiality I have used the letter S to indicate "student" and a correlating
number to identify students answer sheets. These identifier's will be seen on charts and answer
sheets found in the Appendix's. In addition I have designated the sample students as S1, S2, and
S3. S1 identifies the low level learner who also has and IEP for behavior; S2 will designate the
on-level learner who is also the ELL student; and S3 will be attached to the high level learner. As
gender is also used as one of the comparable factors, it is important to note that the sample
students genders are male, male, and female, respectively. In addition to this data are 2 students
who's IEP require them to be placed in third grade math and are placed into interventions during
our math instruction. These students will not be tested in Math and will be identified as S20 and
S21. They will however be tested in the other two assessments.

Pre-Test Analysis

Pre-Test
100%
90%
80%

Class Avg.
47%

70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

Pre-Test

20%
10%
0%

source: see Appendix B

Three of the students were absent on this day and several days after due to the flu. They were not
tested therefore their scores will not be added to this average along with S20 and S21 whose
IEP's require 3rd grade Math interventions.
The class average for this pre-test was 47%. This was not surprising as it reflected highs
and lows of the students ability levels without any lessons from the chapter. Some of the high
level learners including S3 had some back-ground knowledge on the type of number sense
required to pass this test. Needless to say that I was very excited to get started.
Chapter 10 consisted of 12 lessons that would build upon the previous lesson in an effort
to scaffold the information. Over the course of three weeks I was able to use the My Math
lessons on the classrooms SMART board. Each lesson was taught and activities were offered for
each to allow students opportunities to use the information. Each lesson consisted of "guided

practice", and then independent work to be done in class. As the on-level and advanced students
worked, I would sit with a small group of students that wanted help (and some that didn't but I
knew they could use it) and helped them to organize and implement the information they had
received in the lesson. This was also another opportunity for me to link what we learned with
real life experiences within their own circle. One of the students that attended these small group
meetings was S1. He struggled to stay focused during the explicit instructions time but when he
would, he usually understood the concepts being presented. Each of these small groups were
used as informative assessments to gage whether the students were able to move forward.
During the three week period, I used my time with the students during independent work
periods and the students homework as formative assessments. There seemed to be only 1 lesson
that required a re-teach of information. Many of the students were struggling with the idea of
using a model. Although the models were to be used as a tool or strategy, the students struggled
with the idea of it. They were performing well on just doing the math, but to draw it out was a
struggle for some.
On March 27, 2015 I administered Chapter 10's post test. By this time the students had a
chance to do some reviewing the day before. We had also gone over any other questions that
they had about the chapter. Over all the atmosphere was positive and the students acted confident
about taking the test. Again each were instructed to use their blockers and take as much time as
they needed. They were allowed to write on the work sheet and were also given additional paper
to work out any problems if they needed the additional space. The answer sheets are provided in
Appendix B but will not include the additional work sheets they may have needed. As I
mentioned earlier, the post test will consist of the questions from the chapters assessment
choices. This time test 1A is being administered. Its break down appears next.

Post-test (1A)-The left column will indicate the math question to be answered. The center
column indicates the correct answer by its associated letter and numerical answer. The right
column will identify what CCSS that this question is testing.
1. 4 times 3/5ths equals
C. 2 and 2/5ths
multiply a whole number and
a fraction
2. 2/7ths times 9 equals

G. 2 and 4/7ths

multiply a whole number and

a fraction

3. 5 times 2/3rds equals

A. 3 and 1/3rd

multiply a whole number and

a fraction

4. 3/4ths times 1/3rds equals

F. 1/4th

multiply fractions without

using models

5. 3 and 3/5ths times 2 and 2/9ths equals

D. 7

multiply fractions without

using models

6. 5 and 5/6ths times 4 and 1/2 equals

I. 26 and 1/4ths

multiply fractions without

using models

Questions 7 to 11 have a bar graph attached to each. The bar graphs are separated according to
the largest denominator in the problem. The students are to use the bar graphs to help them in
solving each equation. Each are division problems with numbers 10 and 11 written as word
problems. (Refer to Appendix A correlate with this break-down)
7. 3 divided by 1/4th equals

A. 12

divide a whole number by a

unit fraction; use models to
multiply

8. 1/2 (one-half) divided by 3 equals

H. 1/6th

divide a fraction by a whole

number; use models to
multiply

9. 1/9th divided by 2 equals

A. 1/18th

divide a fraction by a whole

number; use models to
multiply

10. Mandy has 7 pounds of raisins to divide equally

into 1/2 pound bags. How many bags can she fill?
Find the unknown in 7 divided by 1/2 equals r.

H. 14 bags

solve word problems

involving mixed numbers;
divide a whole number by a
unit fraction; use models to
multiply

11. There is 1/4th of a birthday cake left over. If 3

friends share it equally, what fraction of the entire
cake will each friend receive? Find the unknown in
1/4th divided by 3 equals c.

A. 1/28ths

solve word problems

involving mixed numbers;
divide a fraction by a whole
number; use models to
multiply

source: Appendix B

As you compare the pre and post tests (1B to 1A) there is very little change in the problems.
The only differences are some number changes in each problem. Even the word problems
remained the same except for number replacements. This will allow for the justified comparison
of results between the two tests as each require the same skills needed for each individual
equation. The following is a chart showing the individual answers per student for each question.
An X will indicate that the student answered incorrectly where an empty box indicates that it was
answered correctly:
Students Responses
Post Test (All students were present for this test)
Key: Blank=Correct; X=Wrong
(Students S17; S18; and S19 will be shown but will not be used in the comparison of Pre and
Post test results)

Name
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
S10
S11
S12
S13
S14
S15
S16
S17
S18
S19
S20
S21

10

11

X X X

X X

X X
X X
X X X
X
X

source: Appendix B

P o s t P re - T

73%
27%
10 0 % 5 5 %
10 0 % 8 2 %
10 0 % 2 7 %
10 0 % 8 2 %
10 0 % 4 6 %
10 0 %
18 %
64%
64%
10 0 % 5 5 %
82%
27%
73%
27%
82%
18 %
10 0 % 6 4 %
9 1%
18 %
10 0 % 3 6 %
10 0 % 10 0 %
9 1%
10 0 %
10 0 %

The following shows the percentage of students that answered a particular question correctly.
Post-Test Only:
Question 1
19/19 or 100% of the students answered correctly
Question 2
18/19 or 95% of the students answered correctly
Question 3
18/19 or 95% of the students answered correctly
Question 4
18/19 or 95% of the students answered correctly
Question 5
15/19 or 79% of the students answered correctly
Question 6
12/19 or 63% of the students answered correctly
Question 7
18/19 or 95% of the students answered correctly
Question 8
19/19 or 100% of the students answered correctly
Question 9
19/19 or 100% of the students answered correctly
Question 10 19/19 or 100% of the students answered correctly
Question 11 18/19 or 95% of the students answered correctly
Students and their scoring ranges.

Students Percentile Placements

2, 11%

1, 5%

2, 11%

100%
90%

2, 10%

12, 63%

80%
70%
60%

source: Appendix B

When we compare both the pre and post test results we can see that there was a
significant improvement. All students except 1 passed the test. The sole person that did not get a
passing grade also did not go down in grade.
Pre and Post Test Comparison:
110%

Post Test
Class Avg.
92%

90%

70%
Pre-Test

50%

Post-Test

30%

Pre-Test
Class Avg.
47%

10%

-10%

source: Appendix B
Over all the class did very well averaging a 92% success rate. One of the benefits the
students teacher offers is that they get one chance to make corrections to any problems they had
not solved correctly. In the case of S8, she did not take advantage of the opportunity to improve
her score. Although the students are given a chance to make any corrections, they however must
find their own mistakes to fix it. This proves to be a successful strategy as the students realize
what they did wrong and have a chance to make it right. S8 did not take advantage of this.
My goal as a teacher is to have a minimum of 80% of the class meeting the requirements
of at least 70% on a post assessment. This Chapter received a passing rate of 95% of the students
that took the post test. In other words 18 of the 19 students that were assessed in the post test
received a 70% score or better.

Another comparison between males and females in the next chart shows that in the pretest the girls edged out the boys by 1% but the boys were able to come back stronger in the post
test scoring 6% higher than the girls. However, it was still a very successful test for both genders.
Comparing the boys to the girls:
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Pre-Test

50%

Post-Test

40%
30%
20%
10%

7 Boys

8 Boys

9 Girls

11 Girls

0%
Boys

Girls

source: Pre and Post Test Charts

Synthesis of Assessments
Question number 6 seemed to be the most problematic as only 63% of them (12 of 19)
were able to solve the equation. This equation asks the students to multiply 2 mixed numbers.
The process for this is to first change both mixed numbers into improper fractions by multiplying
the denominator with the whole number and adding the numerator to the product. In the case of
number 6 the reorganized equation would read 35 over 6 times 9 over 2. During the course of the
instructions we saw that this was not a concern as the guided practice and independent work
sessions did not present any concerns with this process. However, I believe that during the
review prior to the summative chapter test, I did not go over this concept. This alone may have
been the defining factor for this particular question.

Sample Student S1
S1 as stated earlier is a male with an IEP due to behavior. It is believed that this behavior
is the reason that he is a low level learner. He has been interesting to watch in this chapter. He
continued to be challenged with attention issues. S1 did very poorly in the pre-test scoring under
30 percent which was consistent with his IEP. As each lesson was taught I often wondered if he
was retaining anything. As with other students I would work with him during the guided practice
portions. During explicit instruction I made sure to touch his table. I felt this was a way to let
him know that I was thinking about him and wanted him to stay on task.
Due to S1's IEP, I also wanted to make sure that he was getting the additional help that
we promised him through it. As the students begin to work independently on the independent
work sheet I would place myself at a half round table and offer additional help to students that
are still struggling with the concepts. He is one of several students that I personally invite and
have a seat saved for him to sit with me. We worked together through the problems allowing him
to "talk me through the steps" until we came up with a solution. By the end of this session I have

usually felt pretty confident that he understands the concepts. However, he is not one to do his
homework and always has an excuse for not getting it complete. He had to stay in during some
extracurricular activities to get them finished.
S1's performance on the post assessment was a very satisfying surprise. He, more than
anyone was the one that I was concerned with in the class. I know that the extra attention that the
IEP required us to give him really helped. This is the whole purpose of his IEP, to give him the
same advantages for learning as the others have, which required that we spend a little more time
with him, and it worked.

Sample Student S2
The middle range learner or (S2) performed as expected on the pre-test. As expected is
meant that his score is based on his level of understanding and background knowledge of the
concepts to be learned in chapter 10. It is also understood that students learn at differing levels
and speeds, and as the student of choice to represent "on grade level" students, he performed to
his abilities. However, based on his work ethic, I had expected him to do better than any of our
low level learner's. In comparison to S1, he scored over twenty percent higher but still at 55%,
well below a passing grade.
My strategy with S2 was to allow him to learn as the rest of the class. I knew that his
second language would not be an issue. In fact during the course of lessons he was one of the
more active in participation. He always completed his homework but I made sure to check in
with him often (as I did with the rest of the class) to ensure that he was truly understanding the
information and mathematical processes. S2 is a hard worker whom I would often see helping
students in his group with their thinking concepts.

Although I was hoping he would do well in the post test, I was still excited that he has
scored a 100%. I had actually imagined seeing this in his mothers eyes. She was going to be
quite proud of him (I felt).

Sample Student S3
This student was a pleasure to teach. S3 was always to willing to participate in any
discussions. She was also one to point out mistakes that I had made on the board as I was
teaching. In her great wisdom, I also feel that she made it seem as though I were testing the
students comprehension of the situation rather than making it seem like I really did have a
"phoopah". My observation of her and ultimately the choice my mentor and I made to choose
her as my "grade level to above grade level" high level learner were absolutely warranted. As I
noted in the contextual factors, she had been raised in an affluent family with many opportunities
made available to her to grow and learn. Aside from this she had an eagerness to excel at school
and it showed in her willingness to participate and help others.
I had estimated that S3 would do well enough in the pre-test that had it been the only one,
she would have passed it. Her score of 82% was even better than I had anticipated. The strategy
that I felt would be best for her would be to help her stay engaged and give her many
opportunities to learn through teaching. When I knew that she had grasped a concept, I would
invite her to teach other students (next to me so that I could monitor her). As I listened in on her
tutoring opportunities I could see that she was internalizing the concepts the more she taught it.
The more she taught it, she became even more fluid in her explanations.
This strategy of encouraging S3 to teach concepts I feel work well to help her with her
enduring knowledge. Not only was she able to solve a problem for herself, she was also able to
articulate that information for others to understand. In the end the post-test was the ultimate
source of data to correlate with this. S3 had scored a 100%, which seemed expected, but

considering her willingness to help teach, she also helped herself to create a solid schema of
strategies and concepts in dealing with these particular math concepts.