What this looked like in the classroom
I implemented six different math games into my guided math time each day. These six math games included using the Square Tool, number puzzles, concrete math manipulatives, “How Close to 100?”, Pepperoni Pizza, and math cards. The Square Tool was implemented because I used this approach with my students who were struggling with multiplication and division and also my students who were still struggling with addition and subtraction. This tool is a technology based program that uses the idea of arrays or area to solve problems. This strategy helped my students start to develop and understand the nature of quantities. Number sense puzzles have been proven to help increase students’ numerical knowledge. These puzzles were easily differentiated to meet the needs of all of my students. For example, I gave my lower level learners a premade puzzle to solve. My higher level learners were able to create their own puzzle. Creating their own puzzle is a higher level skill, because they have to understand number sense in order to solve for the correct answers. Math manipulatives were implemented for students who were having difficulties in math and they needed a more concrete example. “How Close to 100?”, Pepperoni Pizza, and math cards were implemented to improve students’ number sense in regards to fact fluency.
Students were responsible for playing the games each week during guided math time for six weeks. I taught each of the games during “teacher time” in math rotations. Teacher time is when my different math groups come to my back table to meet with me. These map groups are based on ability and also on students RTI range from their MAP tests. After I taught them the game, the next day they played the game during the “fact fluency” rotation.
I fostered an equitable and accessible learning environment by differentiating the math games based on my students wide range of abilities. For example, my lower level students were given more supports. The square tool game that they were given focused solely on basic addition and subtraction and they were given premade number puzzles. They were allowed concrete math manipulatives such as cubes, blocks, chips, and number lines. “How Close to 100?”, Pepperoni Pizza, and math cards only went over multiplication facts to the nines. My higher level students were given games on The Square Tool that were multiplication and division and were responsible for creating their own number puzzles. “How Close to 100?”, Pepperoni Pizza, and math cards went over multiplication facts to the twelves.
Data Collection Methods
I used formal and informal assessments to track my fifth graders’ learning. A formal assessment that I used was a pre/post test of basic multiplication facts. This was chosen because I wanted to monitor what percentage of my students were proficient in basic fact fluency skills. I also used informal assessments to track my fifth graders’ learning. This included observations of my students playing the math games and taking anecdotal notes based on my observations. My students were also given a Likert scale at the beginning of the study that had them answer questions based on how they feel when performing math tasks. These data collection methods were chosen because I wanted to see how many students were off task during the math games and I also wanted to understand my students’ feelings toward math.
Based on these assessments, I was able to make instructional decisions. During the pretest that was given over basic multiplication facts, I had 6 students who received an 80% or higher. The rest of my students received below 80%. This showed me that a majority of my students were lacking basic math skills such as fact fluency. This allowed me to implement a new rotation during guided math time that was called “fact fluency” this is where my students played the researched based math games that I talked about earlier. Based on my informal assessments of observations and taking anecdotal notes of my students playing the math games during math rotations I was able to adjust my instruction and the difficulty of the game accordingly. Using my students’ answers from the Likert scale, I knew that a majority of my students found themselves spacing off or off task during math rotations, which allowed me to implement the engaging math games.
