Implementation:
For my project I implemented a Math Workshop model. The structure of Math Workshop is similar to that of the writing workshop, consisting of a mini lesson, an activity period, and reflection. Students participated in a 15 minute whole-class mini lesson during which new math content was introduced.
The mini lesson was one of two very brief times when all students were working on the same activity. Within the mini lesson, I extended previous learning, modeled particular skills, generated questions, and/or introduced new strategies. The brief whole-class lesson was new material for some students and review for others. After the mini lesson, students broke into small groups for an extended work session in which they: 1) practiced the new math skills taught that day, 2) built their problem solving skills by solving performance tasks, 3) got hands-on math practice, 4) used technology to practice math skills on IXL or Xtra Math, and 5) received differentiated instruction from me. As one small group met with me, the other students were actively engaged in one of the other math stations.
I met with each small group for 15 minutes. During this phase of Math Workshop, students discussed with one another, myself, or worked independently. I was always actively engaged either with one student or a small group of students. During the last 5 minutes of Math Workshop, I provided a whole-class closure (ie. partner share out). Closure gave students the opportunity to reflect on what they learned from the math lesson verbally or in writing.
The mini lesson was one of two very brief times when all students were working on the same activity. Within the mini lesson, I extended previous learning, modeled particular skills, generated questions, and/or introduced new strategies. The brief whole-class lesson was new material for some students and review for others. After the mini lesson, students broke into small groups for an extended work session in which they: 1) practiced the new math skills taught that day, 2) built their problem solving skills by solving performance tasks, 3) got hands-on math practice, 4) used technology to practice math skills on IXL or Xtra Math, and 5) received differentiated instruction from me. As one small group met with me, the other students were actively engaged in one of the other math stations.
I met with each small group for 15 minutes. During this phase of Math Workshop, students discussed with one another, myself, or worked independently. I was always actively engaged either with one student or a small group of students. During the last 5 minutes of Math Workshop, I provided a whole-class closure (ie. partner share out). Closure gave students the opportunity to reflect on what they learned from the math lesson verbally or in writing.
Reason For Implementation:
Children that are in the same grade level may require different degrees and types of intervention at different times in their school career, or for different aspects of the mathematics curriculum (Benders & Craft, 2016). Classrooms are filled with varying abilities ranging from learning styles to academic readiness. Math Workshop promotes differentiated mathematics instruction which “is a powerful way to potentially increase students learning and is a strategy supported by several researchers” (Huebner, 2010; Murray, 2007; Newton, 2013; Sammons, 2010; Taylor-Cox, 2013 as cited in Benders & Craft, 2016, p. 2). It is difficult to meet the needs of all students at their level during whole-class instruction, but small groups in Math Workshop allow time for students to get needed instruction. Math Workshop offers grouping based on students’ academic needs as determined by formative, summative, and/or diagnostic testing (Benders & Craft, 2016). Small groups that are established by different forms of assessment are more effective than ability grouping because “students are assessed frequently for growth and reassigned to different groups based on assessment” (Tieso, 2002, p. 5). Math Workshop provides students an opportunity to learn at their level and proceed to higher levels of achievement. “Student achievement growth should improve by getting the support they need” (Benders & Craft, 2016, p. 3).
Differentiating instruction through Math Workshop can be incredibly complicated and challenging for the teacher, but it is undoubtedly best practice (Kobelin, 2009). Math Workshop forces educators to adapt, change, experiment, and innovate in an effort to provide a program differentiated to meet the needs of all students. “The philosophy behind the Math Workshop is founded on research and theory that support diverse learners’ understanding of math” (Heuser, 2000, p. 35). According to research, students who participate in Math Workshop are actively involved in math, encouraged to construct their own knowledge, benefit from choice, and receive time to reflect on and communicate their understanding (Heuser, 2000). Math Workshop promotes these things through small group work.
To differentiate for students during the study, they broke into small groups after the mini math lesson for an extended work session in which they practiced the new math skills taught that day, built their problem solving skills by solving performance tasks, got hands-on math practice, used technology to practice math skills, and received differentiated instruction from the me. Small groups included hands-on games, manipulatives, technology, and skill practice sheets. Instruction was differentiated as the small grouping was a data-driven intervention that matched the student’s readiness level for learning with the appropriate instructional strategy, delivering the right content at the right pace. An ongoing intervention process was in place, where a student’s assignment to a particular ability group changed based on performance of improved competency and skill development.
Differentiating instruction through Math Workshop can be incredibly complicated and challenging for the teacher, but it is undoubtedly best practice (Kobelin, 2009). Math Workshop forces educators to adapt, change, experiment, and innovate in an effort to provide a program differentiated to meet the needs of all students. “The philosophy behind the Math Workshop is founded on research and theory that support diverse learners’ understanding of math” (Heuser, 2000, p. 35). According to research, students who participate in Math Workshop are actively involved in math, encouraged to construct their own knowledge, benefit from choice, and receive time to reflect on and communicate their understanding (Heuser, 2000). Math Workshop promotes these things through small group work.
To differentiate for students during the study, they broke into small groups after the mini math lesson for an extended work session in which they practiced the new math skills taught that day, built their problem solving skills by solving performance tasks, got hands-on math practice, used technology to practice math skills, and received differentiated instruction from the me. Small groups included hands-on games, manipulatives, technology, and skill practice sheets. Instruction was differentiated as the small grouping was a data-driven intervention that matched the student’s readiness level for learning with the appropriate instructional strategy, delivering the right content at the right pace. An ongoing intervention process was in place, where a student’s assignment to a particular ability group changed based on performance of improved competency and skill development.
Implementation Process:
The implementation of the Math Workshop model included a focused mini lesson, guided group instruction, cooperative practice, and independent practice. Math Workshop was implemented in the morning of each instructional day during the regular allotted 75 minutes for math instruction. I taught whole group instruction from 8:45-9:00 am. Guided Math immediately followed whole group instruction, giving students 15 minutes at each station. Some students did not move around as much as others as they may have needed additional support during Math Workshop.
The most important component was that each student was in a small group at their appropriate instructional level. Small group instruction allowed me to facilitate the students’ learning through scaffolding, hands-on activities and extra practice. The students who were not in my group were completing extra practice worksheets, playing a game or working on independent skills using IXL or Xtra Math on the computers.
The most important component was that each student was in a small group at their appropriate instructional level. Small group instruction allowed me to facilitate the students’ learning through scaffolding, hands-on activities and extra practice. The students who were not in my group were completing extra practice worksheets, playing a game or working on independent skills using IXL or Xtra Math on the computers.
tIMELINE: |
The first method of data collection was the Aimsweb assessment. The first probe began on Monday, January 29th, and then the students were monitored biweekly following the initial benchmark. Data was collected on Math Workshop for 38 instructional days.
|