MATH
DATA COLLECTION METHODS
Data was collected for my study to show student growth in math achievement over a course of a 6-week collection. Over this period of time, students covered three math topics: addition (pictures and part-part-whole) and measurement.
Climate Survey
A climate survey was given to provide qualitative data on student feelings about the classroom environment. The climate survey was a series of questions about the classroom setting and student ideas about school. The questions varied based on a scale of strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. While explaining this to a group of kindergartners, they were told to think of responding with YES, yes, no, or NO to help give them a feeling behind their response. This data helped to show the culture of the class and its effect on student learning. This data was also intriguing to collect, as an educator, moving forward. It was useful when determining what to adjust to further develop the feeling of community within the class. Although this data didn’t directly correlate to math achievement, it helped provide connections of student perception with math growth. This survey was used as point of data because student opinion on our classroom had not directly been addressed where data was documented. This gave the population of my class the chance to express themselves freely with my CADRE associate. Allowing the test to be read aloud to my student via my CADRE associate made it easier for students to comprehend the questions and give responses orally, rather than trying to navigate online. It is important that students feel that their ideas are heard and valued in our classroom environment.
Topic Pre and Post Test
A piece of quantitative data collected throughout the math intervention was unit/topic pre- and post- tests. These tests were curriculum based and showcased main ideas and concepts covered during the topic. The pretest used was an alternate test provided from the curriculum, so no tests were teacher-created. These tests were used because the question formatting, language, and illustrations match those with which the students are already familiar. This was, especially, helpful because students were able to practice skills daily and then be assessed in the same manner. I utilized both a pre and post test from this curriculum to showcase growth from before the topic introduction through its culmination. The pretest was also used for differentiating throughout the math topic. It helped define student needs that would be addressed and practiced during the topic lessons. Student groups were created based on specific needs, determined by the pretest student data. The pretest data also provided me with a rationale to enrich content for specific students based on their demonstrated mastery before instruction. This data was used because my goal was to improve overall math achievement and these tests showcased their improvement of their mathematical understanding.
Pre-Test Post Test
To start off my research, a pretest was given with math concepts that would be taught throughout the study. The test was created using questions from curriculum aligned worksheets. The questions closely correlated to the format in which it would be given. The same exact test was also given at the end of the 6-week study. This quantitative data was used to show comprehensive understanding of kindergarten addition and measurement ideas. Although the topic pre- and post- test showed growth during the topic, this showed that comprehensive growth, which is important to see as these topics grew and expanded on one another. The goal of this test was to show another point of overall math achievement data.
T-test
Monitoring & Utilizing Data
By implementing small group instruction, I was able to closely monitor student progress daily. While in small group, we would work on our daily math material, as well as additional instruction as needed. The topic pretests allowed me to know students’ level of understanding prior to beginning a topic and show me where their strengths lied. I used this data to shape my small groups, which were fluid and changed based on demonstrated need, and to acknowledge any clear misconceptions that needed to be addressed. The pretests also allowed me to identify students who needed the extra push with deeper understanding of specific math concepts. Hearing their understandings more closely was something that small group work provided to me. Students were able to explain their own thinking and processes through math, this was beneficial to them and their peers. This collaboration would not have been possible without the small group format. Daily conversations were monitored and documented to help when extra intervention time was allotted. If a student showed some misunderstanding, this was recorded on a notepad I kept at the table and referred to later for intervention. Intervention time occurred when a TA would have free time to be an extra set of hands. I would take my recorded sheet with the student and the math concept with some activities to practice. Discussing student growth was a common talking point during my coaching sessions with my CADRE mentor, which helped to gain another perspective on instructional approaches for individual students.