Part C - Assessment Commentary

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

TASK 3: ASSESSMENT COMMENTARY Respond to the prompts below (no more than 10 single-spaced pages, including prompts) by typing your responses within the brackets following each prompt. Do not delete or alter the prompts. Commentary pages exceeding the maximum will not be scored. Attach the assessment you used to evaluate student performance (no more than 5 additional pages) to the end of this file. If you submit a student work sample or feedback as a video or audio clip and you or your focus students cannot be clearly heard, attach a transcription of the inaudible comments (no more than 2 additional pages) to the end of this file. These pages do not count toward your page total.

1. Analyzing Student Learning a. Identify the specific learning objectives measured by the assessment you chose for analysis. [The assessment I chose for analysis was the post-assessment. Therefore, the assessment measured multiple learning objectives taught throughout the segment, with focus on objectives from the final lesson. The learning objectives measured by the post-assessment were: 1. By the end of the segment, when given two two-digit numbers, students will be able to identify which represents a bigger value with 100% accuracy. 2. By the end of the segment, when given two two-digit numbers, students will be able to correctly complete the number sentence with a greater than, less than, or equal to symbol, with 100% accuracy. 3. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to identify why one given two-digit number is bigger than another given two-digit number, with reference to tens and/or ones. 4. By the end of the segment, students will be able to correctly read number sentences aloud using the phrases greater than, less than, equals, or equal to, with 100% accuracy. When objectives #1 and #2 refer to “two-digit numbers,” this includes two-digit numbers in the form of written numerals as well as two-digit numbers in the form of base-ten pictorial representations. Objectives #3 and #4 assess students’ ability to read and justify with written numerals only.] b. Provide a graphic (table or chart) or narrative that summarizes student learning for your whole class. Be sure to summarize student learning for all evaluation criteria submitted in Assessment Task 3, Part D. [ Student FS 1 FS 2 FS 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Pre-Test Score 5 3 6 3 2 5 7 10 6 10 6 11

Post-Test Score 11.5 7 11 11.5 12 10 11.5 11.5 12 10 12 11

Gain +6.5 +4 +5 +8.5 +10 +5 +4.5 +1.5 +6 0 +6 0

Not Yet Mastered #4 #1; #3; #4 #3 #4 n/a #1, pictures only #4 #4 n/a #3; #4 n/a #4

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 1 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Average

4.5 3 4 5 4 10 4 6 7.1

10.5 7 10.5 10 9 12 12 11 10.7

+6 +4 +6.5 +5 +5 +2 +8 +5 +4.9

#4 #1; #3; #4 #4 #4 #1; #4 n/a n/a #4 #4

The chart above provides individual data for each student. The first column, titled Student, states which student the data applies to. (The first three students, labeled with “FS,” are the focus students.) The second column, titled Pre-Test Score, provides the student’s raw score out of 12 on the pre-test given immediately prior to the learning segment. The third column, titled Post-Test Score, provides the student’s raw score out of 12 on the post-test given immediately after the learning segment. The fourth column, titled Gain, tells the number of points the student improved between these two assessments. The final column, titled Not Yet Mastered, lists which of the measured objectives the student did not fully meet on the post-test. In summary… • • • •

17/20 students mastered Objective #1: Identify which number represents a bigger value. 20/20 students mastered Objective #2: Complete number sentences with >, <, or = symbols. 16/20 students mastered Objective #3: Identify how you know which number is bigger with reference to tens and ones. 7/20 students mastered Objective #4: Read number sentences using the terms “greater than”, “less than,” and “equal to” or “equals.”

The last row of the chart summarizes the performance of the whole class. Overall, students scored an average of 7.1 problems correct out of 12 on the pre-asssessment, whereas they scored an average of 10.7 problems correct out of 12 on the post-assessment. On average, each student answered about 5 more problems correctly on the post-assessment than they did on the pre-assessment. Generally, the second and fourth sections of the post-assessment was the area where students made the greatest improvement from the pre-assessment. The second section focused on the second objective listed above, which was to complete number sentences with >, <, or = symbols. The fourth section focused on the fourth objective listed above, which was to read number sentences aloud with specific vocabulary words. The only two students who did not make any gains already had high – but not perfect – scores on the pre-assessment (with scores of 10 and 11). The most commonly unmet objective on the post-assessment was reading number sentences using the terms “greater than,” “less than,” and “equal to” or “equals.” However, all but one of the students were able to correctly read all of the sentences with lessspecific, but synonymous terms, such as “more than” or “smaller than.”] c. Use evidence found in the 3 student work samples and the whole class summary to analyze the patterns of learning for the whole class and differences for groups or individual learners relative to

 conceptual understanding,  procedural fluency, AND  mathematical reasoning or problem-solving skills.

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 2 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

Consider what students understand and do well, and where they continue to struggle (e.g., common errors, confusions, need for greater challenge). [In terms of conceptual understanding, all students have a fairly strong concept of number and value. Most of the students made no errors in their identification of the larger numbers in all of the problems – for example, Focus Students 1 and 3. Only three students demonstrated a notable inconsistency with number and value concepts. This group includes two of my students who have the greatest additional learning needs – one who receives level 3 RTI services and one who receives special education services. For example, Focus Student 2 – the student receiving level 3 RTI services in math – incorrectly identified 25 as greater than 51 and 9 as greater than 30 when the numbers were represented with base-ten block pictures, and she incorrectly identified 27 as greater than 64 when the numbers were represented with written numerals. In the fourth section of the post-assessment, Focus Student 2 read her statement as “twenty-seven is bigger than sixty-four,” thus proving that her error was caused by a lack of number concept, as opposed to misinterpretation of the inequality symbols. All of the students demonstrated conceptual understanding of a number sentence as well. For the fourth section on the pre-assessment, when students were asked to read number sentences aloud, nearly every student (19/20) provided a statement that related the value of one side to the value of the other side every time, even if the statement did not use the specific domain-specific vocabulary. For example, Focus Students 1 and 2 stated verbally that “fifty is bigger than twelve” as opposed to “fifty is greater than twelve.” Their departure from the mowdeled vocabulary – and use of synonyms instead – actually better conveyed their conceptual knowledge of the meaning and function of a number sentence. They did not simply imitate given sentence frames; they formed their own verbal number sentences based on their conceptual knowledge of them. In terms of procedural fluency, 13/20 of the students are able to use efficient and accurate procedures to complete number sentences. For example, Focus Students 1 and 3 both created six accurate number sentences in the second section of problems on the post-assessment. In order to do this, they had to first identify which number represented a greater value by choosing an appropriate strategy based on place value, the number sequence, or skip counting and adding on. Next, they had to recall the correct sign needed to express the comparative relationship identified in the first step of the procedure. Furthermore, in order to demonstrate fluency in the procedure, all of this needed to be done with precision in order to correctly implement the procedure all six times. The rest of the class demonstrated developing fluency with this procedure. Five of the students missed only one of the six problems, and the other two students missed only two of the six problems. None of the students demonstrated any conceptual misunderstandings with the meaning of the signs. Therefore, all of the students know the procedure; several of them just haven’t gained the precision and consistency needed for fluency. In terms of mathematical reasoning, students were very successful overall. On the postassessment, 15/20 of the students were able to reason logically about why one two-digit number was bigger than another two-digit number, with reference to numbers of tens and ones. For example, on the third section of the post-assessment, Focus Student 1 answered that he knew 42 was bigger than 37 because 42 has more tens. All of the other five students who did not answer the question correctly answered either that 42 had “more ones,” such as Focus Student 3, or that 42 had “less tens,” such as Focus Student 2. It is interesting to note that none of the students answered that 42 was bigger because it had “less ones,” which was actually the only other partially correct statement. It suggests that the students may have missed the problem due to a lack of conceptual understanding of place value, and may not provide much measurable evidence of mathematical reasoning skills for this group of students. If they do not Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 3 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

have the conceptual understandings needed to think of a written number in terms of tens and ones, they will not have any information to reason with. On the other hand, it is also possible that the students that answered “more ones” for this question can think of a written number in terms of tens and ones, but cannot apply this information to their attempt at reasoning. It is possible that they reasoned that a number with more ones is bigger than another number with fewer ones (assuming that they have the same number of tens). The students may have not been able to integrate this with the actual numbers and the context of the specific problem, in order to realize that this reasoning does not align in this scenario. In this case, the students may have strong conceptual understanding, but only developing reasoning skills.] d. If a video or audio work sample occurs in a group context (e.g., discussion), provide the name of the clip and clearly describe how the scorer can identify the focus student(s) (e.g., position, physical description) whose work is portrayed. [Not applicable] 2. Feedback to Guide Further Learning Refer to specific evidence of submitted feedback to support your explanations. a. Identify the format in which you submitted your evidence of feedback for the 3 focus students. (Delete choices that do not apply.)

 Written directly on work samples or in separate documents that were provided to the focus students If a video or audio clip of feedback occurs in a group context (e.g., discussion), clearly describe how the scorer can identify the focus student (e.g., position, physical description) who is being given feedback. [Not applicable] b. Explain how feedback provided to the 3 focus students addresses their individual strengths and needs relative to the learning objectives measured. [For all three focus students, problems that were completed correctly were annotated with a star in the upper left corner of the problem’s box to signal to the student that their work was accurate and they understand and can do that type of problem. The stars are a subtle, but clear way of highlighting students’ strengths, without overwhelming them with the amount of feedback on their paper. I also highlighted students’ strengths by providing a positive summary at the top of each students’ paper highlighting their growth from the pre-assessment to the post-assessment. For problems completed incorrectly, I wrote or drew additional information next to the problem (1) to point out what about their answer was incorrect and (2) to provide scaffolding to assist the student in figuring out the correct solution on their own. The only problem missed by Focus Student 1 was the first problem in the last section. For this problem, the student was asked to read the number sentence “50 > 12” aloud to me. The student read the sentence as “fifty is bigger than twelve.” As feedback, I first reminded the student what he said to answer the problem, since that was not recorded on the sheet in any other way. I also pointed out in my feedback why this answer was not the target answer; it wasn’t that his sentence gave an incorrect relationship, but it didn’t use the precise, domainspecific vocabulary that we practiced using throughout the segment. I chose not to tell him exactly what word I wanted him to use, because I know that he knows it based on other formative assessments throughout the segment. By providing the feedback I did, he will be able to complete the problem correctly on his own, now that he is reminded of the expectations for reading inequality symbols. Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 4 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

Focus Student 2 missed six problems on the post-assessment. The three problems that she missed on the front side of the post-assessment all reflected her inconsistent conceptual understanding of place value and number concepts. The feedback I provided on these problems was to represent each number with the alternative type of representation as well. If it was a problem where she struggled with base-ten pictorial representations, I wrote the written numeral next to the number; if it was a problem where she struggled with written numerals, I drew the base-ten pictorial representation next to the number. Depending on the numbers, the type of representation that she is most successful with varies. The feedback I gave accommodates her by providing her with an additional representation that she can use to solve the problem on her own. On the back side of the post-assessment, Focus Student 2 missed the problem in the third section which asked her to circle the bigger number (which she did correctly) and then finish the sentence to reason why that number is bigger (which she did not answer correctly). My feedback for this question highlighted both her strength and her need. I told her that she did circle the correct number, so the first part of the problem was successful. I also asked her, “Does it really have less tens?” to point out what she missed about the second part of the problem. In order to scaffold her to allow her to fix the problem on her own, I added base-ten pictorial representations of both the numbers in the problem, to provide her with a more concrete, visual representation of tens and ones to help her reason about them. Finally, she also used synonyms in place of the target vocabulary when reading the number sentences in the fourth section of the post-assessments. Unlike Focus Student 1, I did include the specific target vocabulary terms in my feedback for Focus Student 2. On the formative assessments throughout the segment, I never noticed the student independently using the vocabulary terms, so I differentiated my feedback for this student by including the target terms. Focus Student 3 only missed one problem, in the third section of the post-assessment. Like Focus Student 2, Focus Student 3 did circle the correct number, but did not correctly finish the sentence to reason why that number is bigger. Thus, I provided the same kind of feedback as I did with Focus Student 2. I highlighted her strength in correctly identifying the bigger number, but asked, “Does it really have more ones?” I also again added base-ten pictorial representation of both the numbers in the problem, to scaffold her with a more concrete, visual representation of tens and ones.] c. Describe how you will support each focus student to understand and use this feedback to further their learning related to learning objectives, either within the learning segment or at a later time. [The following week, I am going to return all of the students’ post-assessments to them. I will give them a couple minutes to look through the assessment on their own, read my comments, and try to understand their mistakes. This is appropriate for my students, because I used language in my feedback that nearly all of the students can read nearly independently, or with the help of a neighbor. Additionally, I will explain to the students that we are going to spend a few minutes reviewing the “With the Teacher” section at the end of the post-assessment, because that is the part that seemed most difficult. I will put the greater than, less than, and equal to signs on the board. I will ask students what vocabulary words we use when we read each of those out loud. I will ask for synonyms for these words as well – other words we could say instead. I will list all of these ideas on the board. I will then highlight that while they are all mostly correct, using the words “greater,” “less,” and “equal” are the most precise. I will explain that those are the words mathematicians use, because they have a clear meaning and they talk only about value. We will discuss what value means and how that is different than size or quantity, which the synonym words could be referring to, making them less clear or precise. We will practice writing and reading several number sentences on the board with the target Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 5 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

vocabulary so students can practice. As I give students time to work on the new week’s tasks, I will also conference with each student individually to go over their assessment and clarify any persisting misunderstandings or confusions. This will be especially crucial in order to help my struggling readers and my students who have a hard time persisting at difficult tasks be able to use my feedback moving forward.] 3. Evidence of Language Understanding and Use When responding to the prompt below, use concrete examples from the video clip(s) and/or student work samples as evidence. Evidence from the clip(s) may focus on one or more students.

You may provide evidence of students’ language use from ONE, TWO, OR ALL THREE of the following sources: 1. Use video clip(s) from Instruction Task 2 and provide time-stamp references for evidence of language use. 2. Submit an additional video file named “Language Use” of no more than 5 minutes in length and cite language use (this can be footage of one or more students’ language use). Submit the clip in Assessment Task 3, Part B. 3. Use the student work samples analyzed in Assessment Task 3 and cite language use. a. Explain and provide concrete examples for the extent to which your students were able to use or struggled to use the

 selected language function,  vocabulary and/or symbols, AND  discourse or syntax to develop content understandings. [The language function selected for this segment was to compare. All students were able to compare numbers to some degree, though many are still developing the ability to do it in multiple ways and with a variety of different types of grade-appropriate representations. For example, the first section on the post-assessment asked students to simply circle the bigger number. This is a lower-level comparison task, because the student does not have to use any syntax or vocabulary to represent the comparison; all the student has to do is identify the greater number. 17/20 students were able to compare numbers consistently in this way. All of the students were able to do it correctly on at least one of the problems from the first section, and they were able to simply identify the bigger number in over 50% of all of the problems on the assessment. First grade students are also expected to compare numbers and represent the comparison in the form of a number sentence. On the second section of the post-assessment, students needed to complete the number sentence with a >, <, or = symbol to represent their comparison. 20/20 students were able to compare numbers this way with over 50% accuracy and a demonstrated understanding of the signs. 13 of the students were able to compare numbers with a written number sentence with 100% accuracy. Finally, the students were asked to compare two numbers with a verbal statement by reading a written number sentence. 19/20

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 6 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

students were able to do this, but only 7 of those students did so with the precise, domainspecific vocabulary that was taught. There are seven content-specific vocabulary words and three symbols that students must understand and use in order to be successful throughout the learning segment. Receptive use of the word compare seemed to be mastered by all of the students, because every student knew how to follow the directions on the assessment or in other learning tasks when it asked them to compare two numbers. Students also must understand the meaning of the term number sentence, as they are asked in the post-assessment to “read this number sentence out loud.” 19/20 students (everyone except my student who receives special education) is able to immediately comprehend this statement by the time of the post-assessment and they are able to carry it out in ways that show conceptual understanding of a number sentence (i.e. by including all of its parts). It is interesting to note that when administering the pre-assessment, many of the students could not comprehend what I was asking them to do, let alone do it, when I asked them to read a particular number sentence. Thus, students grew a lot in their understanding of a number sentence. Students also must understand and use the meanings of the words tens and ones; the first video clip from Instruction Task 2 shows students thinking about and discussing the numbers of tens and ones and how they look on a hundreds chart. Additionally, 16/20 students were able to reason with tens and ones on the post-assessment, demonstrating an understanding of the vocabulary. Finally, students must be able to understand and use the words greater, less, and equal, as well as the symbols that represent these words. All 20 of the students have mastered the symbols, as can be seen in the summarizing data above. However, only 7 students chose to use “greater than,” “less than,” and “equal,” suggesting that it may not be in everyone’s expressive vocabulary yet. In terms of syntax, all of the students recognized the conventional format of a written and spoken number sentence. For example, in the second section of the post-assessment, all of the students understood that one equal or inequality sign was needed in the circle, and nothing else. Many students did not yet understand this on the pre-assessment, so great improvements were made. Additionally, the 19 students who were able to read the number sentences aloud by the time of the post-assessment all understood that they are read from left to right, with the conventional pattern of “[number] is less/greater than [number]” or “[number] is equal to [number].] 4. Using Assessment to Inform Instruction a. Based on your analysis of student learning presented in prompts 1b–c, describe next steps for instruction to impact student learning:

 For the whole class  For the 3 focus students and other individuals/groups with specific needs Consider the variety of learners in your class who may require different strategies/support (e.g., students with IEPs or 504 plans, English language learners, struggling readers, underperforming students or those with gaps in academic knowledge, and/or gifted students needing greater support or challenge). [My next step for whole class instruction is to move on to our next topic of addition of two-digit numbers. I believe moving on is appropriate for the bulk of my students, because 17/20 of my students earned at least 10 points out of 12 on their post-assessment, and analysis of the postassessment suggested that nearly all of the students either only need more practice with

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 7 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

reading number sentences aloud with precise, domain-specific vocabulary, or they have mastered all of the concepts. Furthermore, even my three students who demonstrated significantly less mastery, two of which consistently have greater learning needs, will continue to get the instruction they need if we move on to the next topic, because their biggest gap in understanding is with foundational concepts and understandings that carry over to the next unit as well. Sequencing is extremely important to learning outcomes (Culatta, 2018), so it is necessary that we continue working on foundational skills like place value, number concepts, and reasoning, before we focus on written representations and complex procedures. Another thing I will do moving forward is provide more differentiated instruction. We have worked with place value for long enough now that some of the students are becoming more comfortable working with it much more quickly than others, which is causing a growing range of abilities. I will provide more differentiated instruction by presenting some students with numbers involving hundreds; presenting some students with larger two-digit numbers than others; or for my two with immense additional learning needs, meet in small group settings while other students are working, in order to provide intense instruction on place value and number concepts, as well as the relationship between place value and written numerals. Moving forward, I will also plan to teach the language I want them to use more explicitly. The main objective that students did not meet in the learning segment was the one that asked them to read number sentences aloud using the terms “greater than,” “less than,” and “equal to” or “equals.” Most students knew how to do this task conceptually, but they had not integrated these words into their express vocabulary yet. Therefore, when I teach the subsequent unit on addition of two-digit numbers, I will focus on words like “sum,” “column,” “tens,” “ones,” “trade or group.” I will explain why this language is important, and I will give students more time to hear it as opposed to just listening to it. This will help all my students, but it will probably be especially helpful for my EL student. He did not make any gains from the pre-assessment to the postassessment. The only questions he missed both times were those requiring the ability to produce the target vocabulary words from the segment. Had this instruction been more specific, he might have been able to take advantage of the little bit of room to grow.] b. Explain how these next steps follow from your analysis of student learning. Support your explanation with principles from research and/or theory. [My next step is to move on to the next unit on addition of two-digit numbers. This is appropriate based on my analysis of student learning, because nearly all of my students demonstrated mastery or near mastery of all concepts and processes taught throughout this segment. Additionally, two of the students who were further from mastery based on post-assessment results tend to be consistently far behind grade-level mastery. Thus the concepts and procedures they need to focus instruction on are foundational skills that are found in the next unit as well, so they will continue getting the practice they need. Moving forward, I will also provide more differentiated instruction, as my students’ range of knowledge and understanding related to place-value is growing as my advanced students become very familiar with it. For example, although I will generally use mixed-ability grouping for group work moving forward, as this has consistently been found to have positive effects on all students (Linchevski & Kutscher, 1998), I will occasionally group by ability in order to provide more focused, differentiated instruction on each student’s strengths and needs. My advanced students can tackle more challenging tasks like those with hundreds or those with regrouping, to help them understand the material on a deeper conceptual level. Additionally, the students who Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 8 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

did not master the objectives that most of the class did during the learning segment can have a chance to work with me in a small-group setting to work on those objectives. For example, Students #3, #6, and #17 were the only students that demonstrated unexpected non-mastery of certain skills on the post-assessment. Student 3 struggled with the objective that no one else struggled with that objective alone. Students 6 and 17 struggled with objectives that I did not expect them to struggle with based on typical performance. Differentiated, small-group time will be especially crucial to them as I have time to address their unique misconceptions and misunderstandings that may not have gotten addressed with the whole class. The smaller-group setting will help these students receive the individualized attention they may need to learn the material (Jung, McMaster, Kunkel, Shin, & Stecker, 2018).] The increased focus on learning tasks that emphasize the academic language throughout the unit will also benefit students by introducing this more challenging concept more explicitly. Throughout the segment, my instruction on the language function and the relevant discourse was rather informal. This more formalized, scaffolded instruction on how to explain a process or procedure will make expectations more clear to all the students, but it will especially help my students with Cerebral Palsy, EL needs, and undiagnosed academic needs who benefit from having component skills explicitly targeted. Scaffolding and sentence frames are both wellsupported strategies for the teaching of academic language, particularly with groups of students who tend to struggle with language (Kinsella, 2010). I will also provide more opportunities for students to not just listen to the language, but to practice it, as this is necessary for acquisition.]

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 9 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

References: Culatta, R. (2018). Sequencing of instruction. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/concepts/sequence-instruction/ Kinsella, K. (2010). Academic language function toolkit: A resource for developing academic language for all students in all content areas. Sweetwater District-Wide Academic Support Teams. Retrieved from https://www.tntech.edu/files/teachered/edTPA_Academic-Language-Functions-toolkit.pdf Linchevski, L. & Kutscher, B. (1998). Tell me with whom you’re learning, and I’ll tell you how much you’ve learned: Mixed-ability versus same-ability grouping in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(5), 533-554.

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 10 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 11 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.

Elementary Mathematics Task 3: Assessment Commentary

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 12 of 12 | 10 pages maximum All rights reserved. V5_0916 The edTPA trademarks are owned by The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Use of the edTPA trademarks is permitted only pursuant to the terms of a written license agreement.