History
My capstone project focused on my second-grade class for the 2018-2019 school year at a suburban school district. The school educated 370 enrolled students. In 2nd grade for 2018-2019, the enrollment was 72 students. The demographics of those students were; 88% Caucasian, 4% two or more races, 3.5 %, and 0.5% African American. Of those students, 12.13% qualified for free and reduced lunch. The demographics reflected the diversity inside and outside the classroom. I built rapport with both my students and their families to enforce importance on academic success.
Within my classroom, five of twenty-three students were on an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). One student qualified for alternate assessment, which means they qualified to not take district common assessments due to their IEP. Additionally, three students followed a specific goal plan from the Student Assistance Team (SAT). Due to this diversity, my class received at least 5 movement breaks throughout the day to attain focus.
Out of my twenty-three students, seven demonstrated characteristics of high ability and attended the enrichment program, guided by the High Ability Learner Education (HALE) coordinator. Three students qualified for Title 1 Math Intervention. These students qualified through their Fall Measurement of Academic Progress (MAP) scores. MAP, a district-wide assessment, taken three times a year to measure student growth in both math and reading. The diversity in our classroom illuminated the various mathematical abilities that I worked towards improving with strategies through differentiated instruction.
Need
Given the fall MAP data, my class struggled in the Number Sense standard. The standard deviation was 16.6. A standard deviation above 13 suggests whole group instruction is insufficient in meeting the various academic needs of students. In my class, ten students scored below-grade level expectations, four scored average and six scored above average. This data highlighted the need to differentiate and level instruction for whole numbers, counting and cardinality and place value. and regrouping. I used whole group instruction to introduce and enforce place value skills and guided instruction for students who needed remediation on one or two additional number sense skills. Differentiated instruction was also given to students who showed above-grade-level scores and needed scaffold instruction of enrichment for the math concept.
Another data point used to showcase the need for my study was math topic tests through the math curriculum, Pearson Education. Out of the six tests, 10 students scored below grade level expectation. Three of these students attended an after-school math intervention to work on specific math skills. Daily differentiated instruction was embedded because scaffolding instruction would assist the below-level performing students to reach grade-level expectations. Depth and complexity were activated to challenge the students performing at the above grade-level. I wanted to make sure each student would be taught math at the instructional level; instead of something too easy or too difficult. This would improve math achievement on MAP, Pearson tests, and helped achieve SAT goals.
Another data point used to support the need for differentiation in my classroom was an online program, Xtramath. This program provided practice for basic math facts and tracked the progress of each student and their automaticity with knowing the math facts. When I looked at the Xtramath data, eight students received more than 25% incorrect, six students received 10-25% correct, and seven students scored 90% or more correct when utilizing the program. Three of my students mastered the component of addition in Xtramath and began the subtraction portion. One of my students passed both addition and subtraction and continued to work on multiplication facts. This vast array of math readiness and skill proficiency had importance because it showed me the need for diversity of instruction for math concepts within my classroom.
AimsWeb is a district-wide assessment taken online three times a year to help progress monitor math computation. The student data from AimsWeb suggested scaffold times to be spent with each group in math rotations. The program provided expectations for the six students, who scored below average, received 15 minutes of daily guided instruction. The eleven on-level students received ten minutes of leveled instruction and the nine students above-average level received five minutes of leveled instruction. The AimsWeb data showed a wide range of math achievement within my classroom which influenced the need for differentiated instruction for each student to reach the math concept.
Students in my district were assessed on their progress toward standards within District Common Assessments (DCA). For the two-digit addition DCA, six of my students passed with a score of 100% and will be working on enrichment activities to deepen their thinking. The remaining students in the class were introduced to the math concept through whole group instruction. Through formative assessments, which occurred outside of the learning, allowed for me to use this data to plan my instruction. This was an area I wanted to improve because my focus used to be mainly on the students who struggled.
Importance
I wanted to make sure the learning goal was active for each of my students, which would be achieved through differentiated instruction. All students should be pushed to improve their math achievement. The purpose of my study was to allow me to work with all students through differentiated instruction to make continual progress in their math achievement.
My students were asked to complete a student survey to capture their perceptions and feelings about math. The baseline data showed 60% of students preferred to work with manipulates during math. 48% of my students surveyed math to be easy for them. Through reflection of behaviors during whole group instruction, this was an area where off-task behaviors occurred.
During an on-task check, taken by my principal, 65% of students were found to be on task during whole group math. This is important data because 35% of my students were off-task during that specific time period. To be on-task, students needed to be writing, talking, or working on something with their hands. This data showcases the off-task could be from the whole group math instruction being at an inappropriate level for some students and correlates to the 48% of students who surveyed math is easy for them.
The information gained from this study was important because it required me to meet my students at their learning level and use differentiated instruction to make the learning goal active for each student to reach math achievement. Through this information, my instruction time was scaffold and differentiated from formative assessments to make the learning impactful for each of my students.
As an educator, I was unsure how to meet each individual need in my classroom through only whole group instruction. As a reflective scholar, I chose to use professional strategies and data collections to monitor student math achievement. My student supported the utilization of differentiated instruction to deepen the knowledge of applications within the classroom, which allowed for each student to make growth. With access to highly qualified professionals within my district, I had resources for advice and collaboration in mathematics. As I tapped into these resources, my math instruction became more purposeful and effective. This study also allowed me to gain new perspectives for the best ways to meet the varied needs of learners in my classroom.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This paper was a synthesis of various sources focused on the use of mathematical differentiation in the classroom during math. With the focus of student-centered teaching, these sources provided a sound structure for guided teaching to make learning visible to both the teachers and students (Hattie, 2017).
The purpose of my study was to determine if the implementation of differentiated instruction would positively improve student achievement in math. For my study, I administered individual assistance and guidance to help my students understand concepts in the math curriculum. No matter the level of understanding, each of my students were provided patience and support to gain knowledge of whole numbers, counting and cardinality, and place value, and regrouping.
As teachers, our job was to positively affect our students by teaching them proper skills, strategies and practices to use for growth in their mathematical success. This was succeeded by knowing your students and finding the correct approach to meet their needs. In my second grade classroom, there was a wide range of skill which requires a variety of teaching approaches. For my students who demonstrate characteristics of high ability and strong understanding of the math concepts, my goal was to meet their needs and deepen their thinking with enrichment. There were students who may have needed repetition with a skill to build knowledge and confidence. Also, a handful of my students found math to be challenging and confusing. This is consummated through differentiation through interventions, on-level instruction, or enrichment to ensure all students cultivate their learning.
The diversity in my classroom, based on the data I have collected, conceptualized the need for differentiated instruction. Because of this perceived need for differentiation I implemented an action research study in my classroom. The purpose of my study was to determine if differentiation of instruction increases student achievement in math. Differentiation is “the implementation of effective instructional strategies based on formative assessment data which guides teachers to determine how each individual student will attain the learning goal” (Wright, 2018).
In order to implement best practices into my action research study, I collected and synthesized numerous articles and resources on differentiation. This deepened my knowledge and built my confidence to implement differentiated math instruction within my classroom, for my students. This paper was organized to define guided practice, knowing the learners, depth and complexity within differentiation, various way of implementation, and purposeful questions. Both strengths and weaknesses are discussed to assist my implementation.