Geometry Data talk 9/8/10
Team: Bagel
Step 1: Develop Inquiry based Questions, Identify priority standard/skill and present data

PRE-TEST
Teachers' Names
Number of students who took assessment
Number of students proficient (70%) and higher
Percent of students proficient and higher
Number of students close to proficient
Percent of students close to proficient
Number of students with way to go
Percent of students with a way to go
Number of Students Far from proficient
Percent of students far away from proficient
Hall, Andy
25
1
4.00%
1
4.00%
4
16.00%
19
76.00%
McKay, Erica


#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!
Smith, Gina
26
0
0.00%
1
3.85%
1
3.85%
24
92.31%
Thompson, Bill
31
4
12.90%
8
25.81%
7
22.58%
12
38.71%
Trexler, Liz
22
1
4.55%
0
0.00%
2
9.09%
19
86.36%

Step 2: Analyze Data to Determine Root Causes

Performance Behaviors- what?\
1. Did well at solving easy proportions
2. Okay with 1-step
3. Highly motivated
Inferences- why?
1. Seen these before
2. Used scale factors
3. We’re awesome teachers.
Obstacles (errors)- what?
1. Combining like terms
2. Couldn’t start solving proportions with expressions
3. Add/sub pos/neg numbers
Inferences- why?
1. Don’t know inverse operations
2. Lack of patience/focus
3. Lack of basic skills
4. Haven’t seen hard proportions
5. Lack of instruction to this point


Step: 3 Establish smart goal
The percentage of Algebra students scoring proficient or higher in solving equations and proportions will increase from 5.7% to 80% by the end of September as measured by the pre-assessment/summative assessment administered on Oct. 1, 2010.
Step: 4 Select Common Teaching Strategies

Strategies for Solving Equations
· Teachers will commit to drawing a line at the equal sign to clearly separate the 2 sides of the equal sign.
o This will hopefully alleviate the errors of adding twice to the same side.
· Teachers will require students to show all work and in a vertical alignment.
o This will allow for teacher to easily find errors.
· Teachers will commit to assigning students to solve equations daily.
o Either in warm-up, classwork, or homework.
Step 5: Determine Results Indicators
  • If the teacher draws a line at the equal sign then the student will not add/subtract twice on the same side.
  • If the student shows their work vertically then the teacher and student can easily locate errors and misconceptions.
  • If the teacher assigns equation work daily the students will improve or maintain proficiency in solving equations.

Formative assessments: Daily work and quiz
Summative Assessment: Test over solving equations and proportions


Geometry Data Talk 9/1/10

Team Name: G2
Data Team Focus: Geometry problem approaches.
Standard:
Assessment Directions: Have students analyze the following picture. Students should (1) Identify related angles and (2) list the angle relationships and special properties that apply to them.
Assessment Prompt:
(picture will be inserted soon)
Rubric:
Four point scale
4 Advanced: Students will use appropriate geometric symbols (such as external image clip_image002.gif ) and algebra to set up equations in addition to proficient requirements.
3 Proficient: Students can identify which angles are related and state the reason why or what strategy they would use to solve for a missing angle.
2 PP: Students can identify which angles are related and state the reason why or what strategy they would use to solve for a missing angle with some omissions.
1U: Students are unable to identify which angles are related or what strategies to use. Or Students miss a substantial amount.

Timeline: Give to students prior to 9/8 and bring data to data talk.

Team KBagel
2nd data team exploration
Step 1:
Teachers' Names
Number of students who took assessment
Number of students proficient (70%) and higher
Percent of students proficient and higher
Number of students close to proficient (60-69%)
Percent of students close to proficient
Number of students with way to go (50-59%)
Percent of students with a way to go
Number of Students Far from proficient (0-49%)
Percent of students far away from proficient
Hall, Andy
21
11
52.38%
2
9.52%
3
14.29%
5
23.81%
McKay, Erica


#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!
Smith, Gina
105
1
0.95%
2
1.90%
1
0.95%
101
96.19%
Thompson, Bill
50
2
4.00%
0
0.00%
6
12.00%
42
84.00%
Trexler, Liz
25
10
40.00%
7
28.00%
3
12.00%
5
20.00%
Total
201
24
11.94%
11
5.47%
13
6.47%
153
76.12%
Step 2:
Performance Behaviors- what?
1. Students not attempting problems
2. Didn't care, not motivated
Inferences- why?
1. Lack of comprehension
2. Because math is not words
Obstacles (errors)- what?
1. lack of reading skills
2. Written word problems/math/work off before even attempting the problems
3. order matters with different operations
Inferences- why?
1. Lack of patience/focus
2. Lack of basic skills
3. Lack of instruction to this point
Step 3:
All Algebra 1 students will move up 1.5 levels of proficiency in writing equations from sentence descriptions measured by the pre-assessment/summative assessment administered prior to December 3, 2010.

Step 4:
  • Teacher will commit to underlining key information and write the operation in symbol form above the word in the description.
  • Teachers will commit to defining variables and explaining when there is more than one variable.
  • Teachers will commit to using the 3 step Problem Solving Graphic organizer


9/8/10 Math Team G2
Data for Preassessment
Teacher
# of students
Advanced
Proficient
Partial Profic.
Unsatisfactory
Newberry(4)
16
1
3
9
3
Newberry(5)
22
0
1
9
12
Newberry(7)
24
0
0
5
19
Heath(1)
22
0
5
6
11
Heath(6)
22
0
5
7
10
Stewart( )





Stewart( )





Total
106
1
14
36
55


1%
13%
34%
52%

Root Causes
Performance Behaviors Why?
1. Not motivated Believe its unimportant
2. Just don’t understand Lack foundation
3. Lack of confidence Previous school failure
4. Highly motivated Goal oriented
Obstacles
1. Overfocus on the example
(too many vertical angles)
2. Avoid using new material Want to stick with what they know
3. Confusing to stay general Class overemphasis on solving



Smart Goal
The percentage of Students scoring proficient or higher in the problem solving strategy will increase from 14% to 24% by the end of the quarter as measured by applying the strategy to the lines and transversal graphic administered on Monday Oct 4th.

Instructional Strategies
1. In class examples using estimation instead of directly solving.
2. In class and assignments of focusing on the steps and thought process instead of answer (more think aloud – ‘crime scene investigator’)
3. Take 5 (Read 3 times, predict answer with units, pick a strategy, find answer check prediction, communicate answer)

Determine Results Indicators

If teachers directly instruct and practice the 3-step pre-solving strategy, then students will complete the three steps on exit tickets..
If teachers provide exit tickets each day, then students will improve in their ability to articulate questions about problems before solving problems.

Data for 2nd Assessment
Teacher
# of students
Advanced
Proficient
Partial Profic.
Unsatisfactory
Newberry(4)
14
1
4
6
3
Newberry(5)
20
2
4
8
6
Newberry(7)
19
0
2
6
11
Heath(1)
22
0
9
7
6
Heath(6)
18
0
8
2
8
Stewart( )





Stewart( )





Total
93
3
27
29
34


3.2%
29%
31.2%
36.6%



Team Name: Bagel
Data Team Focus: Solve simple linear equations (one, two, multi-steps, and proportions)
Standard: Algebraic Structures (Standard 2)
Directions: Solve each equation for the variable. SHOW ALL WORK (see attached)
Prompt/Assessment: (see attached)
Rubric: (no electronic copy; hand written copy will be available)
Overall score (26 points total)
One-Step (4 points total)
Two-Steps (6 points total)
Multi-Step (8 points total)
Proportions (8 points)
Timeline: assessment must be given and data collected, ready for discussion at next team meeting (09/08/2010)
Name Date _

Solving Equations
Pre-Assessment



Solve each equation for the variable. PLEAE SHOW ALL WORK J

1.
Answer: t =



2.
Answer: r =



3.
Answer: y =



4.
Answer: t =


5.
Answer: m =



6.
Answer: x =




7.
Answer: b =




8.
Answer: n =




Team Name: Doughnut

Data Team Focus: Solving Absolute Value Inequalities
Standard: to be labeled later
Directions: solve the absolute value inequality in steps and justify the answers.
Prompt: hand written copied off of the board
Rubric: 4 point scale
4 – Advanced: Able to identify the type of absolute value inequality, sets it up and solves it correctly and graphs.
3 – Proficient: Able to accomplish three of the four criteria listed under advanced.
2 – Partially Proficient: Able to do two
1 – Unsatisfactory: Student shows no understanding of the concept.
Timeline: assessment must be given and data collected, ready for discussion at next team meeting (09/08/2010)

Identify the type of absolute value inequality (“and”/”or”) and then solve the inequality to graph the solution set.Math Team Doughnut 9/8


      • of Students
Advanced
Proficient
Partially Proficient
Unsatisfactory
Nickolai (1)
25
9
8
3
5
Nickolai (2)
23
8
6
4
5
Glaushauser (1)
22
10
3
7
2
Glaushauser (2)
22
3
11
6
2
Glaushauser (3)
26
13
4
3
7
Kantner
35
0
1
9
25
Total
153
43
33
32
46
Percentage

28
22
21
30



Successes

They will scribe the notes – all they know how to do

Drills – memorization

Self-Motivation – outside support

Ask Questions – they care to know why


Obstacles

Too focused on examples – rely too much on past experiences

Lack of Confidence – low skills/what they’ve internalized

Unmotivated – see above

Lack of Foundation – poor attendance

Lack of Concentration



Smart Goal


The percentage of Algebra II students scoring proficient or higher in solving equations will increase from 50% to 70% by the end of September as measured by common assessment Unit 1 Test on September 29th.

Instructional Strategies

· Include in warm-ups multi-step equations at least once a week.

· Use a basic skills sheet (basic operations, order of operations, etc) at least once a week in place of warm-ups.

· Revisiting skills when building bigger/new concepts.

· Spiral old material covering solving equations on future assessments.
Result Indicators

If the teacher will model the step by step process of solving equations, then students will take notes and ask inquiry based questions.


If the teacher shows each step for each problem, then the students ill understand with more clarity.


If the teacher provides regular examples/exercises, then the students will increase in proficiency.


If the teacher uses guided notes, then the students can model and mimic the guided notes to improve proficiency.


Formative Assessment - Daily Warm-Ups

Summative Assessment - Unit Assessment


Formative Assessment – Exit Ticket


Solve the equation for y and graph it.

4x + 6y = 12


Scoring – 4 pts


4 pts = Advanced à Solve correctly and graph correctly

3 pts = Proficient à Equation solved correctly; graph incorrect

2 pts = Partially Proficient à cannot correctly complete solving; may or may not be able to graph

1 pt = Unsatisfactory à attempted problem

0 pt = No Evidence of comprehension à Did nothing


# of Students
Advanced
Proficient
Partially Proficient
Unsatisfactory
No Data
Glashauser(1)
21
8
5
3
3
2
Glashauser(2)
28
14
8
2
2
2
Glashauser(3)
25
3
1
6
10
5
Kantner
18
5
1
8
4

Total
92
30
15
19
19
9
Percentage

33
16
21
21
10

Geometry girls!!!!! Second round

Objective: Students will be proficient at using algebra to set-up and solve geometry problems involving Pythagorean Theorem and similarity.

Assessment:
3 Step Problems solving

Problem:
Define variable:

Set up algebraic equations:

Solve for the unknown:
Communicate your answer here:

Rubric:
Rubric for data team:
1 (u)
2 (pp)
3 (p)
4 (a)
Defined variables
(no correct equation)
Defined variables, set up correct equation (did not solve correctly)
Defined variables, set up correct equation, solve correctly
Proficient + communicates answer in complete sentence with units.
Strategies:
Think Alouds
Consistency in format in reinforcing in modeling and in exit slips.

Algebra II - 2nd round

Objective - Students will be proficient at factoring quadratic equations to solve for the zero values of the equation.

Rubric - Score appropriately on the quiz given such that it can be assesed to a 4 point scale.



# of Students
No Data
Unsatisfactory
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced
Glashauser
65
1
8
13
27
16
Kantner
74
29
10
14
5
16
Nickolai
58
15
3
7
17
16
Totals
197
45
21
34
49
48
Percents

23
11
17
25
24


Smart Goal -
The percentage of Algebra II students scoring proficient or higher in solving quadratic equations by factoring will increase from 49% to 70% by the end of November as measured by common assessment Unit 3 Test.

Geometry girls!

Round Three, Intervention


1/27/11

After mining data, we are focusing on moving students from unsat-high to partially proficient. This data shows deficiency in standards 1 (number sense), 3(statistics) and 5(measurement)
Our assessment measures % proficiency of benchmarks under these standards.

Smartgoal
The percentage of geometry intervention students scoring proficient or higher in standards 1,3, and 5 will increase from 25.5% to 70% by friday, March 4, 2011 as measured by a comprehensive galileo assessment administered every friday. The students will improve the percentage of students proficient per benchmark according to :
|| || || pre-ass || goal ||
10.1.1b
5
0.95%
26%
10.1.3a
4
3.81%
28%
10.3.1a
4
7.62%
34%
10.3.1b
1
24.76%
50%
10.3.1c
3
3.81%
29%
10.3.4a
1
25.71%
51%
10.3.5a
2
6.67%
32%
10.3.6a
4
1.90%
27%
10.5.1b
3
0.95%
26%