Running Head: IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 1

Impact on Student Learning Analysis

Crystal Bennett

Kennesaw State University

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 2

Impact on Student Learning Analysis

Introduction and Demographics

I teach at Woodstock Elementary School which is a Title I school with a vast majority of

learners and ethnicities that without a doubt impacts the learning environment. Woodstock is part

of Cherokee County School District and strives to maintain high performance despite the

socioeconomically issues in the community. With 47% of students on free and reduced meals,

technology resources in the home are limited (CCSD, 2015). Over the past year, our community

has developed multi-million dollar neighborhood homes, and this has caused a large gap in

economic status among students and their access to technology at home. Moreover, the gap is

being noticed more by students. At Field Day, we sell snacks for the students to purchase and

parents are always invited to attend. One of my wealthy parents noticed students that did not

have any money to spend, and she gave them each two dollars to spend at the concession stand.

This kind gesture brought a discussion into my classroom as to why some students do not have

as much money as others. In an effort to keep up with technology, some schools in my district

have piloted a Bring Your Own Learning Device program where students are allowed to bring

technology into the classroom. I cannot help but imagine the emotional impact that will happen

to students of lower economic status. With such a large difference in social classes, I feel this is

my biggest obstacle in the classroom. In fact, “family incomes is now a better predictor of

children’s success in school than race” (Reardon, 2013). Despite, the growing gap in academics,

experiences, and success of different economic classes, I hope to try new, proven methods to

help close the achievement gap among my different socio-economical students. Unlike in the

past, we are gaining students that are gifted, typically not of economic disadvantage, at the same

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 3

rate as students qualifying for EIP services, typically of economic disadvantage. Differentiated

Instruction is no longer optional; it is a must.

Our school is fortunate to be so diverse and embrace our cultures. We have 60% white,

19% Hispanic, 13% black, 2% Asian, 1% Native American, and 5% multiracial (Report Card,

2015). Our Title I parent facilitator coordinates an international festival each year for parents and

students to showcase the many countries our school calls home. This event has really been

successful in teaching students how to respect and understand other cultures. As a teacher, it

allows me to learn more about my students and the ideas they value.

My school currently houses 1,111 students, and we are projected to continue to grow in

size as our community grows (CCSD, 2015). This year we went well over what the country

projected our numbers to be, and we are hoping to gain additional staff to support our student’s

needs. I teach three ninety minute blocks of 4th grade math, and we were hoping to have a

reduced class EIP model. However, our numbers are so high that we are not going to be able to

do this. Therefore, in my “small” class of 24 students I have 22 students that qualify for EIP

math services, but currently we do not have enough support to fulfill the need. Hence, it is my

job to provide those students with differentiated tasks and settings to meet their needs.

In additional to high number of qualified EIP, my class has 12 ESOL students, meaning

English is not their primary language at home. This impacts their ability to read and solve word

problems because they lack a strong vocabulary. Additionally, I struggle with communicating

with parents of ESOL students. Our school is fortunate to have a parent facilitator that speaks

Spanish and English, but the everyday support at home is simply not there for some of my ESOL

students. Unfortunately, several of our ESOL students are also considered economically

disadvantaged. Therefore, the parents often are limited on transportation to attend school

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 4

functions and the ability to provide outside learning experiences for the child. The students

struggle with academics, motivation, and fitting in with their peers. Without a doubt, this impacts

their learning experience and shows in academic scores.

My other two math classes are gifted mixed with average. One of my goals this year is to

differentiate lessons to better meet the needs of my gifted learners. Unfortunately, achievement

and developmental levels vary so much in a class of 30 that whole- group instruction is tough. I

prefer small-group and/or extremely interactive lessons in a whole group setting. In analyzing the

large difference in social class of students, the lack of EIP support due to high enrollment

numbers, and my large amount of ESOL students, I strive to make an instructional setting that

will leave a positive, successful impact on my students’ learning.

With so many varied student needs, I have attempted to analyze the demographics and

learning styles of my students. I have researched ways to educate a classroom setting and create

projects that are fair with such varied economic, language, and support status. Last year, the state

launched a program called Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) in an effort to allow

teachers to make data-driven decisions to improve student learning. This program has aided in

my research of students because it offers valuable information that directly impacts academics.

In the SLDS website, a teacher can view the movement of the students, the academic grades,

standardized testing results, and any socio-economical barriers that might impact learning.

Previously, teachers had to wait on cumulative folders from schools to be mailed, but now we are

granted a direct portfolio on our child. Another feature that I have found valuable is the ability to

look at all previous years. However, my favorite feature is the ability to select a group of

students and the system will tell you that groups strengths, absenteeism, weaknesses, averages

scores, average demographics, and other valuable personal information. Knowing all these

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 5

factors about my students allows me to plan instructional assignments and settings that will best

meet their needs.

During my analysis, I looked forward to conducting research among my students to see

what instructional plan best meets their needs. In my analysis, I used my middle fourth grade

math group. This group is made up of 1 teacher and 28 students. Of the 28 students, I have 3

speech students, 6 gifted students (divided into 3 motivated vs. 3 unmotivated), 6 qualified EIP

students, 3 ESOL, 2 students with 504’s, and 8 students considered economically disadvantaged.

All lessons began with whole-group motivation and introduction, partner work, small-group

work and individual work. However, each element of instruction included various forms of

technology and different platforms. My Impact on Student Learning Analysis focused on

evaluating the impact of technology led instruction within three academically differentiated

groups of students. Also, I looked at what extent technology integrated lessons in mathematics

impacted student subgroups (speech, motivated gifted, unmotivated gifted, EIP, ESOL,

economically disadvantaged, and 504’s) critical-thinking skills.

Curriculum and Learner Outcomes:

Learner Outcomes: This Area and Perimeter unit is taught in conjunction with our math

series, GO Math, and our daily math warm-up activity. Students are presented real-world

material in spiral review manner during warm-up, and they are taught more in-depth concepts

through GO Math. I conducted this lesson over the course of three days with my fourth grade

math class during a ninety minute segment. The lesson covers the Georgia Standards of

Excellence 4th grade Area and Perimeter Measurement Standard. Each day, students were

presented with progressive, real-world tasks to gain knowledge of area and perimeter.

 

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 6

Standard: CCSS.Math.Content.4.MD.A.3 Apply the area and perimeter formulas for

rectangles in real world and mathematical problems.

Objective: The students will be able to define and calculate area and perimeter of

polygon shapes and apply formula knowledge to solve real world mathematical

measurement problems.

Lesson plan: The lesson was taught to my class of 28 students using varied methods

within the lesson. Additionally, each method of instruction included various forms of

differentiated technology and diverse platforms. After lesson presentation, students were divided

into three academically differentiated groups based on data score and subgroup information.

Pretest: Students took the GO Math Area and Perimeter pretest on their assigned laptop.

(see Appendix A for a preview of the GO Math testing platform). The teacher printed a report

from their GO Math Personal Math Trainer and formed three groups.

Introduction: Students viewed a motivational Perimeter and Area video song

(K6Elearning, 2013). The teacher completed an interactive KWL chart with students using

Activinspire.

Lesson: The teacher used the interactive GO Math flipchart to complete new concepts

and introduction of area and perimeter. The GO Math lesson also shared an introduction link to

real-world application of area and perimeter. It reviewed prior knowledge and provided a basic

overview of new skills using the GO Math Interactive Student Edition. After the lesson

introduction, students were placed into three differentiated groups: Extended, Core, and

Modified.

Small-Group Instruction/Centers: The teacher continued the small group instruction

using Go Math Differentiated Activities and completed the GO Math assigned problems based

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 7

on skill level. Then, students worked with the teacher to complete a tiered activity with

technology integration.

Extended Task Group: Students selected 3 surfaces in the classroom to measure and

calculate area and perimeter. Then, when only given total area or perimeter, students

were asked to find objects within the classroom whose lengths met the requirements.

Technology Integration: Students solved real-world area and perimeter questions

through an interactive castle journey (Elearning, n.d.).

Core Task Group: Students selected 3 surfaces in the classroom to measure and calculate

area and perimeter. Then, students recorded the results in at least 2 creative ways, and

students created real-world word problems based upon their findings.

Technology Integration: Students explored area and perimeter in varied shapes.

As shapes become more irregular, higher-order questions are inquired (McGraw,

1999).

Modified Task Group: Students selected 3 surfaces in the classroom to measure and

calculate area and perimeter. Students matched surface areas and perimeters from objects

in our classroom.

Technology Integration: Students calculated area and perimeter by matching sides

with total and vice-versa in two interactive gaming platforms (Sheppard, n.d.).

  Home Connection Project: Students created a floor plan of their house, or favorite

location, and measured lengths to solve area and perimeter of at least 6 rooms. Students were

given a choice board to decide what presentation tool or method they would like to use to display

their project. A scoring sheet was also included for review (see Appendix B for more information

on the Home Connection project).

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 8

Posttest: Students took the GO Math Area and Perimeter posttest on their assigned

laptop. The teacher printed a report from their personal math trainer and offered remediation as

needed. All students that did not score a 100 percent were asked to make test corrections in

which they had to identify their error and then solve the problem correctly. All students that

scored below 75 percent were given the option to retest after receiving two before or after school

tutoring sessions with the teacher.

Differentiated Instruction: Using the technology included in GO Math, the teacher

checked personal math trainer pretest score for area and perimeter. The modified group, lowest

students, were grouped together and the teacher focused on being able to define and calculate

simple shapes area and perimeter. The core group, middle group, worked on calculating the area

and perimeter of abnormal shapes. The extended group, highest group, worked on calculating the

area and perimeter when given a missing length. All of these tasks were completed using a hands

on, interactive model and an integrated technology element.

Research soundness:  A pretest was given to see where the students are and what they

remember before teaching the unit. Then, students were placed into groups based on their ability.

My ability groups are not static, they are flexible to allow students support and acceleration as

needed. Ability grouping has been a common form of differentiation in education. However, if

educators are static in their grouping and not flexible, it will not be successful. On the contrary,

when flexible ability grouping is used appropriately and effectively, students win. Researcher

and professor, Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, president of the National Association for Gifted

Children, reports many of the benefits and research promoting ability grouping in her 2013,

Education Weekly Article. “They receive the right content at the right time from teachers better

able to direct their instruction to a smaller group of students. Additionally, because the students

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 9

are concentrated with others who have similar levels of knowledge and learning rates and clear

learning goals, they can better challenge one another to grow further. The latest evidence makes

clear that flexible ability grouping is effective, enabling students to make the types of gains all

educators should desire and expect (Olszewski-Kubilius, 2013).”

Method:

Students took a pretest and a posttest using their assigned laptop on GO Math: Personal

Math Trainer. On this 20 item assessment, students are instructed to define and calculate area

and perimeter of simple shapes and abnormal shapes that can be formed into a rectangle.

Additionally, students are given real-world problems in which the formula for area and perimeter

must be applied to solve. The teacher forms the ability groups based on the pretest results. After

the posttest, the teacher supplemented with enrichment and remedial activities to further

differentiate instruction. All students that did not score a 100 percent were asked to make test

corrections to encourage mastery of the standard. In their test corrections they had to identify

their error and then solve the problem correctly. All students that scored below 75 percent were

given the option to retest after receiving two before or after school tutoring sessions with the

teacher. The data from the pre and post-test is listed below under the reporting of data.

Analyzing and Reporting the Data:

The data from the pre and post-test is thoroughly analyzed using multiple statistical

techniques and representations. This analysis is focused on 28 fourth grade math students. The

data seeks to look at the impact of technology led instruction for area and perimeter within

various groups.

In my whole group analysis, I looked at the comparison of pre and post test results and

noted the growth points between the two tests. The mean score for the pretest was 37.68 percent

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 10

and 82.68 percent for the posttest. There was an average increase of 45 points between pre and

posttest results. In looking at the standard deviation of 16.139 in my post-test, I feel that it is an

appropriate deviation due to the varied learners within the classroom. I feel that all students made

significant gains, but some students needed additional support in order to master the concept.

With a mean score of 82.68 percent on posttest, there is certainly overall room for continued

growth. These scores were to be expected based on low pretest scores that indicated a lack of

prior knowledge of area and perimeter. Due to the high rigor and difficulty of area and perimeter

concepts, I continue to use daily warm up exercises and centers that focus on this key standard.

A whole group comparison model as well as the raw data scores are shown below.

Student 1

Student 2

Student 3

Student 4

Student 5

Student 6

Student 7

Student 8

Student 9

Student 10

Student 11

Student 12

Student 13

Student 14

Student 15

Student 16

Student 17

Student 18

Student 19

Student 20

Student 21

Student 22

Student 23

Student 24

Student 25

Student 26

Student 27

Student 28

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Area and Perimeter Test Scores

Pre Test Post Test

Student

Scor

e

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 11

Area and Perimeter Raw DataStudent Pre-Test Post-Test Growth Points

Student 1 0 60 60Student 2 20 100 80Student 3 5 55 50Student 4 10 80 70Student 5 35 90 55Student 6 75 100 25Student 7 70 95 25Student 8 65 85 20Student 9 55 100 45Student 10 40 85 45Student 11 15 50 35Student 12 25 80 55Student 13 70 100 30Student 14 30 65 35Student 15 30 70 40Student 16 45 95 50Student 17 50 85 35Student 18 60 100 40Student 19 65 75 10Student 20 70 95 25Student 21 25 60 35Student 22 0 50 50Student 23 20 85 65Student 24 10 85 75Student 25 35 90 55Student 26 40 85 45Student 27 40 100 60Student 28 50 95 45AVERAGE 37.68% 82.68% +45

In my first sub group analysis, I compared the 8 students that were considered

economically disadvantaged to the other 20 students not considered economically disadvantaged.

In comparing the data, it is quickly noticeable the difference among the two groups. The

economically disadvantaged average a 20 point deficit among the two assessments, but

surprisingly, they show similar growth rates. This information is extremely valuable in the

support of prior knowledge when introducing new concepts. Prior knowledge is extremely

valuable in mathematics because each concepts builds on previous skills and transfers to an

understanding of new concepts. “Without prior knowledge, learners may not have a mental

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 12

model to map the base and target problems and thus, may be unable to transfer” (Dinsmore,

Baggetta, Doyle & Loughlin, 2014). The fact that my economically disadvantaged students are

not only in poverty, they are also lacking prior skill sets needed to be successful in the

classroom. Consequently, I plan to use this data to target these students with basic skills lost in

previous years. It is my hope to help close the achievement gap that persists among these

students. I think it is worth noting they most appear capable of learning due to a similar growth

rate of non-economically disadvantaged peers. This is encouraging as I move forward in my

instructional planning. The data analyzed for my economically disadvantaged subgroup can be

seen below.

1 2 3

23.75

66.88

43.1343.25

89.00

45.75

Economically Disadvantaged Vs. Not Economically Disadvantaged

Economically Disadvantaged Mean Not Economically Disadvantaged Mean

An additional sub group that I wanted to examine was the impact of instruction on the 6

EIP students versus the non-EIP students since this is my first year that I have not had additional

EIP support in my classroom. The results, listed below, showed that EIP students averaged 19.32

points less on the pretest, 26.74 points less on the posttest, and had 7.42 points less in growth

scores when compared to students that are not in EIP. This data is consist with benchmark

scores, last year’s grades, SLDS information, and math grade. Most EIP students need additional

support, modified assignments, and remediation of material. Additionally, I think it is worth

1= Pretest2= Posttest3= Growth Scores

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 13

noting that 3 out 6 of my EIP students were also considered economically disadvantaged. That

means that half of my EIP students are living in poverty. This information was not surprising as

this has been a trend in my years of education, especially at my Title I school. I will continue to

research and implement best practices to help support the individual learning needs of my EIP

students.

1 2 3

22.50

61.67

39.1741.82

88.41

46.59

EIP students Vs. Non-EIP Students

EIP Students Non- EIP Students

In my individual analysis, I looked at two students that represented two different

performance levels. Student 6, labeled gifted, had the highest score on the pretest, a 75, and he

made a 100 on the posttest, resulting in a 25 point growth score. I compared his achievement

with a less successful student 22, labeled economically disadvantaged and EIP, and I compiled

the evidence in a bar data chart shown below. Student 6 scored 75 points higher on the pretest

and 50 points higher on the posttest when compared to student 22. Due to the fact that student 6

scored so high on the pretest, 75, he only had a chance of 25 growth points. However, student 22

scored a 0 on the pretest and had the chance to have a change of 100 growth points, but he only

gained 50 points. The results support my initial introductory thoughts and demographics that

there is clearly a gap among my varied socioeconomically students and academic achievements.

1= Pretest2= Posttest3= Growth Scores

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 14

1 2 3

75

100

25

0

50 50

Comparing Two Students

Student 6 Student 22

Reporting Data

Students took the pretest and a posttest using their assigned laptop on GO Math: Personal

Math Trainer (see Appendix A for a preview of the GO Math testing platform). This program

automatically shows the score and data to the student upon completion. Then, the program

emails a copy of the report to the parents. For parents that do not have internet or email access, I

printed scores and sent home. Also, after taking the pretest I sent home the GO Math School

Home Letter in both English (see Appendix C) and Spanish (See Appendix D). To further illicit

a strong understanding of Area and Perimeter, students worked on a home connection project to

bridge an understanding of mathematics and how it relates to the real-world (see Appendix B for

more information on the Home Connection project). Also, I offered before school and after

school tutoring sessions in my classroom to assist with test corrections. On behalf of students

that could not come in early or stay late, I pulled during our homeroom study time. All students

that did not score a 100 percent were asked to make test corrections to encourage mastery of the

standard. In their test corrections they had to identify their error and then solve the problem

correctly. All students that scored below 75 percent were given the option to retest after

receiving two tutoring sessions with me.

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 15

Reflecting on the Data:

After analyzing and reporting the data, I feel that the lesson and the use of integrated

technology aided in my students ability to understand such a difficult concept. All students

improved on the posttest, and the data charts supported my previous thoughts and notions stated

in my introductory. I feel that my whole-group then transition to small-group instructional

strategy benefited this lesson because I was able to differentiate concepts on student levels. This

helped with student motivation because the gifted felt challenged and the EIP did not feel

defeated. In asking my students what they liked most about the lesson, most stated the online

computer games. Hence, my desire to include more instructional strategies that cater to the use of

technology not only by the teacher but also by the students. Also, students favored the choice

board given for the home connection project. In reflecting, I feel that it is because my technology

savvy students were able to use programs that they enjoyed, while my students that did not have

technology were still able to present the material in a neat manner. Students were able to flourish

their creativity into the lesson. One of my students used spaghetti noodles to make a model of his

home. Another student used Geo Sketchpad, converted it to Paint, and created a replica of his 6

favorite rooms at our school. My math class was one of his rooms; I was honored and impressed

by his use of technology. “Technology not only allows teachers to provide differentiated

instruction for gifted children and adolescents, but also serves as an educational and creative

outlet for some of the best and brightest minds in the world” (Periathiruvadi, Rinn, 2012). I feel

that not only can I use the technology in the classroom, but I can also allow students to create

even more home connection projects using technology. As a teacher, I enjoyed the variety in

creative presentations, and the fact that my students were eager and motivated in learning about

area and perimeter. Those that appeared to be highly motivated with prerequisite knowledge of

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 16

area and perimeter had the highest posttest scores. Without a doubt, “Motivation plays an

essential role in learning and it affects various fields of education” (Kahveci, 2010).

Subsequently, I will immediately plan to implement more motivational introductions to lessons,

and research games and outside technology integration that supports the curriculum.

Also, when considering the individual items on the assessment that most of my students

struggled with I can reflect and plan instructional warm ups that address their need. When given

simple area or perimeter questions such as, “The length is 4. The width is 2. What is the area and

perimeter?” my students did well. However, when given the total area or perimeter my students

struggled with working backwards to find missing sides. This concept has been notoriously

difficult in previous years among all learners, especially those with a lack of prior knowledge of

area and perimeter. However, I found that when I modeled the scenarios with Legos, students

were able to break down the elements and work it out. Hence, I feel I need to spend more time on

this part of the standard to help my students reach the mastery they need to be successful.

Additionally, I will use the online computer program called Tenmarks to continue to

collect data on my students understanding of Area and Perimeter. Within the Amazon created

website, students are asked to solve open ended questions, and they are offered hints, videos, and

tutorials on how to solve it. This is a great remediation tool, but it is also a successfully tool in

continuing spiral, cumulative assessments of standards taught. Moreover, it breaks down the

problems and does the data collection and analysis for me. Therefore, I can use that data to know

exactly what part of area and perimeter my students are still struggling with and can immediately

implement appropriate instructional strategies to aid students.

In moving forward, there is always future action for improved practice to allow me to

gain the professional growth desired. In a review of this lesson, I have three professional learning

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 17

goals that emerged based upon my insights and experiences. First, I want to develop more home

connection projects that allow students the chance to use technology as a presentation tool, but I

also want to continue to provide materials and ideas to students without technology in the home.

Secondly, I want to continue to serve students with some amount of small-group instruction

based on academic levels. I want my groups to continue to stay static and flexible so that true

differentiation can occur based on pretest results. Thirdly, I want find additional supportive

measures to help my EIP students since I do not have additional instructional support in the

classroom. I want to help close their achievement gap by providing them with basic skill sets lost

in previous years. Additionally, in their small group time I want to show them videos and do

activities to provide them with a background to build new concepts and curriculum on. In

addition to my previous plan to implement more motivational introductions to lessons, I have

two other goals that I would like to implement. Effective immediately, I will offer all students

without technology in the home, with the intent of targeting those considered economically

disadvantaged, with before school, after school, and study hall time to access technology games,

databases, and programs to gain skills to feel successful in using technology. Also, not only am I

going to have students explore the technology, I am going to have my EIP students linked to

basic skills games of lessons that are coming up. By allowing these students a chance to have

some prior knowledge of content before it is taught, I hope to see a new data trend with less gap

among my economically disadvantaged and EIP. Through these goals, I will continue to collect

data and change my instructional practices to better reach the needs of my diverse learners.

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 18

References

CCSD: Cherokee County School District. (n.d.). Retrieved June 10, 2015, from

http://www.cherokee.k12.ga.us/

Dinsmore, D. L., Baggetta, P., Doyle, S., & Loughlin, S. M. (2014). The Role of Initial Learning,

Problem Features, Prior Knowledge, and Pattern Recognition on Transfer Success.

Journal Of Experimental Education, 82(1), 121-141. Retrieved September 18, 2015 from

http://proxy.kennesaw.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=91735228&site=eds-live&scope=site

E-Learning for Kids (n.d.). Castle in the Clouds: Area & Length [Flash game]. Math World.

Retrieved September 14, 2015, from

http://www.e-learningforkids.org/math/lesson/castle-in-the-clouds-area-length/

Kahveci Murat. (2010). Student’s Perceptions to Use Technology for Learning: Measurement

Integrity of The Modified Fennema-Sherman Attitudes Scales. The Turkish Online

Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (1) , 185-201. Retrieved September 18, 2015, from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ875782.pdf

K6Elearning. (2013, August 30). Perimeter and Area Song [Video file]. Retrieved

September 14, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk-PyhjFWw4

Mcgraw, R. (1999, January 30.). Exploring Area and Perimeter [Java game]. A Unit for Tech

Prep Mathematics Courses. Retrieved September 14, 2015, from

http://www.indiana.edu/~atmat/units/area_perimeter/area_o.htm

Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2013, May 20). Setting the Record Straight on Ability Grouping.

Education Week. Retrieved August 24, 2015, from

http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2013/05/20/fp_olszewski.html

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 19

Periathiruvadi, S., & Rinn, A. N. (2012). Technology in Gifted Education: A Review of Best

Practices and Empirical Research. Journal Of Research On Technology In Education

(International Society For Technology In Education), 45(2), 153-169. Retrieved

September 23, 2015, from

http://proxy.kennesaw.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=cph&AN=84296839&site=eds-live&scope=site

Reardon, S. F. (2013, April 27). No rich child left behind. The New York Times. Retrieved

August 24, 2015, from http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/no-rich-child-

left-behind

Sheppard, B. (n.d) Area Shape Game [Flash game]. Sheppard Software. Retrieved

September 14, 2015, from

www.sheppardsoftware.com/mathgames/geometry/shapeshoot/AreaShapesShoot.htm

Sheppard, B. (n.d) Perimeter Shape Game [Flash game]. Sheppard Software. Retrieved

September 14, 2015, from

www.sheppardsoftware.com/mathgames/geometry/shapeshoot/PerimeterShapesShoot.ht

m

The Governor’s Office of Student Achievement: Report Card. (n.d.). Retrieved June 10, 2015,

from https://gaawards.gosa.ga.gov/analytics/K12ReportCard

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 20

Appendix A

GO Math Assessment Preview

This is a sample shot of the platform for the online 20 question pre and post assessments students take in their GO Math: Personal Math Trainer. In accordance to copyright laws, and HMH policy, only samples can be shown.

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 21

Appendix B

Area and Perimeter Home Connection Project

Directions: Students will create a floor plan of their house, or favorite location, and measure

lengths to solve area and perimeter of at least 6 rooms. Students may decide what presentation

tool or method they would like to use to display their project using the choice board below.

Additional information on Area and Perimeter can be found on Mrs. Bennett’s website, the GO

Math online portal, and the GO Math text.

Presentation Choice Board (Please choose one tool)

Geo Sketchpad PowerPoint Google Slides

Sketch and Calc Lucid Chart Paint

Cacoo Shoebox Display Poster Board

Twiddla Dabbleboard *Student Choice (Must be approved by teacher)

Scoring Requirements

No Credit (0) Partial Credit (5) Full Credit (10)

Student does not use appropriate presentation tool.

Students uses a presentation tool, but does not use all

elements in a creative manner.

Student uses presentation tool thoroughly, creativity, and

appropriately.

Student does not find area and perimeter.

Student finds area or perimeter but not both. OR

Student does not find the area and perimeter of all 6 rooms.

Student finds and displays area and perimeter of 6

rooms.

Student shares presentation with little confidence and understanding of Area and Perimeter concepts.

Student shares presentation with some confidence and understanding of Area and

Perimeter concepts.

Student shares presentation with strong confidence and understanding of Area and

Perimeter concepts.

Due: Thursday, September 17, 2015 *Presentations will occur Thursday and Friday in class.

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 22

Appendix C

Area and Perimeter School Home Letter

IMPACT ON STUDENT LEARNING ANALYSIS 23

Appendix D

Area and Perimeter School Home Letter (Spanish Version)