Sunteți pe pagina 1din 143

Vermont Mathematics Partnership

Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP)


Overview

Vermont Mathematics Partnership


www.vermontmathematics.org

1 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

What we are going


to do today…

• Engage in an overview of OGAP and its


underlying principles
• Engage in an activity about formative
assessment

2 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

1
VMP OGAP Design
Team members
• Leslie Ercole,VMP
• Plus over 250 Vermont and
• Linda Gilbert, Dotham Brook School
Alabama teachers and about
• Kendra Gorton, Milton Elementary School
• Steph Hockenbury, Chamberlin School
5000 students who participated
• Beth Hulbert, Barre City Elementary and Middle School
in OGAP Exploratory Studies in
• Amy Johnson, Milton Elementary School
2004 and 2005, and 2006 -2007
• Bob Laird, VMP
and 2007-2008 roll-outs.
• Ted Marsden, Norwich University
• Karen Moylan, Former VMP Active OGAP National
• Cathy Newton, Dotham Brook School Advisory Board
• Susan Ojala, Vermont Mathematics Initiative
• Mary Lindquist, Callaway Professor of
• Marge Petit, Marge Petit Consulting, MPC

Mathematics Education, Emeritus; Past
Regina Quinn, VMP President of the National Council of Teachers
• Loree Silvis, VMP of Mathematics

• Corrie Sweet, Former VMP • Ed Silver, University of Michigan


• Tracy Thompson, Ottauquechee School
• Judith Zawojewski, Illinois Institute of
• Jean Ward, Bennington Rutland Supervisory Union
• Rebecca Young, Hardwick Schools
Technology

3 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Sources of Evidence and Interactions


Design Committee – school based leaders and teachers, assessment expert, a
mathematician (distillation of hundreds of research articles used as the foundation of
OGAP tools and resources)
2004 Study

2005 Study

National Advisory Board


revisions

revisions

Cognitive
Labs
Sub-studies and
revisions

Exploratory Studies Scale-up in Vermont and Alabama


Purpose: to refine tools, and processes, (Interaction with over 200 educators
OGAP professional development. (over 4000 students) in Vermont and Alabama.

Artifacts and Analyses Artifacts


~ Mentor observations ~ Materials feedback
~ Student work archives (over 30,000 pieces) ~ Samples of student work
~ Teacher logs linked to student work ~ Unit plans (teacher leaders)
~ Post Surveys ~ Teacher action research
~ Interviews ~ Post Surveys
~ Teacher background surveys ~ Teacher background surveys
~ Post focus forum ~ Pilot teacher assessment
~ Student retention study (8 months later) ~ Advisory
~ Follow-up surveys (8 months later)

4 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

2
The VMP Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP)
was developed to respond to two needs:

• To improve student learning in


mathematics for all students as it relates
to state and national learning
expectations.
• To provide quality instructional
information as students are developing
their understanding of concepts so that
interventions for a class as a whole or
for individuals can be made “on time.”

5 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Findings From Classroom Observations


and Interviews (VMP 2003)
• Teachers rarely monitored students’ understanding -
prior to or during instruction.
• Teachers believed that students had adequate prior
knowledge for the lesson - and that if they did not, it
was mostly due to low ability - innate deficiencies.
• Teachers believed that students in the class were
learning what the teacher was intending to teach –
usually based on the responses of a few students.
• Teachers were often surprised and frustrated when
students did poorly on subsequent assessments.
• Teachers attempted to use large scale assessment
information to inform instruction and were quickly
frustrated.
6 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

3
Four Principles
that Guided OGAP Thinking,
Work, and Products

7 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Design Principles
• Principle 1: Build on Pre-existing
Knowledge (National Research Council, 2000)

• Principle 2: Learn (and assess) for


Understanding (NRC, 2001)

• Principle 3: Use Frequent Formative


Assessment (NRC, 2003; Black and Wiliam, 1998)

• Principle 4: Build Assessment on Cognitive


Research (NRC, 2003; Black and Wilam, 1998)

8 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

4
Principle 3: Use Frequent
Formative Assessment
Examples Non-examples

Features that distinguish formative assessment


from summative assessments

9 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

What do researchers say


about formative assessment?
• “Learning gains from systematic attention
to formative assessment are larger than
most of those found for any other
educational intervention.” (NRC, 2003, page 13)
• Many of the studies show that improved
formative assessment helps low achievers
more than others, thereby reducing the
spread of attainment while also raising
achievement overall.

10 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

5
Principle 3: Use Frequent
Formative Assessment

• Vermont Mathematics Partnership


Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP)…

…One Formative Assessment Strategy

11 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

OGAP Formative Assessment


Fractions Multiplicative Reasoning Proportionality

•An intentional and systematic approach to


formative assessment that
• involves pre-assessing student knowledge
• provides strategies for analyzing the pre-
assessment
• provides tools (item banks and analysis tools)
that supports a continuous and intentional
probing of students’ developing understanding

12 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

6
Principle 4: Build Assessment on
Cognitive Research

Distilled and used to …

… develop short focused


items (and bank of items)
… interpret student
designed to elicit developing
work and inform
understandings, common instruction.
errors, preconceptions, or
misconceptions.
13 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

•It is not formative assessment alone OR


knowledge of cognitive research alone…

•…but the marriage of the two that


empowers teachers.

14 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

7
Understand Evidence in Student
Work Used to Inform Instruction
Shade 5 of the figure
8
Thomas’s Response Dyson’s Response

Going beyond celebrating …understanding the instructional


different strategies TO… implications and taking action

15 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Evidence of Student Work


Additive Transitional Multiplicative
Strategy Multiplicative Strategy Strategy

One tricycle has Write an equation to Farmer Brown


three wheels. match this picture. donated 7 dozen
How many wheels do eggs to the senior
29 tricycles have? center. How many
eggs did he donate?

16 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

8
OGAP PROPORTIONALITY FRAMEWORK (11/2008)
Structures of Problem Students move back and forth
between proportional strategies,
and non-proportional reasoning,
Mathematical Topics Problem Multiplicative Relationships Ratio depending upon the structure of
and Context Types Relationships the problem, the context in
Ratios Ratio Both integral Part: Whole which the problem is situated,
Rates (Density) Rate Both non-integral Part: Part and the strength of their
Rates (D=RT) Comparison Some non-integral proportional reasoning.
Rates (Buy/Consume) Missing value Ratio Referents
Similarity Scale factor Numbers (Cramer, Post & Currier, 1993;
Implied
Scale Qualitative Karplus, Pulos & Stage, 1983;
All integers Explicit
Probability Non-proportional VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006 & 2007)
All non-integers
Percents
Both integer and non-integer Representations
Linear equitations
Linear patterns and Graph
relationships Internal structure Table
Slope Parallel structure Model
Frequency distributions Non-parallel structure

Evidence of Student Work


Proportional Transitional Proportional Non-proportional Underlying Issues,
Strategies Strategies Reasoning Errors, Misconceptions
• Finds and applies unit rate • Builds up/down • Guesses or uses random • Errors in the applications
• Compares simplified • Finds equivalent operations of cross-product
fractions, rates, or ratios fractions/ratios with • Uses additive reasoning • Uses additive strategy in solution
• Applies multiplicative an error • Uses whole-number • Misinterprets meaning of quantities
relationship • Uses models reasoning • Remainders are not treated
• Sets up proportions and uses • Makes a cross-product • Solves non-proportional correctly
cross-products error situations proportionally • Units inconsistent or absent
• Uses y=kx (either symbolic or • Makes an error in • Misinterprets vocabulary • Errors in equation
graphic representations) applying a multiplicative and related concept • Computational error
• Applies the correct ratio relationship • Rounding error
referent in ratio problem • Uses incorrect ratio referent

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR- 0227057) November 25, 2008 Version
Teachers say...
•that knowledge of research coupled
with tools and resources sensitive to the
research helps them…
• Understand the purposes of activities
in mathematics programs;
• Use evidence in student work to
inform instruction;
• Strengthen and focus initial
instruction;
• Respond to evidence in student work
as instruction proceeds.
17 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

OGAP Proportionality Framework


Structures
of Problems

Mathematical Other
Topics And Structures
Contexts

Evidence in Student
Work to Inform Instruction

Proportional Transitional Non-proportional Underlying


Strategies Proportional Reasoning Issues, Errors,
Strategies Misconceptions

18 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

9
Graphic Comment Mid-year Student self
organizers only grading exams assessment
Non-graded Non-graded Student
Graded pre-
pre- exit work
assessments
assessment questions analysis
End of Unit Probing Screening
Homework
Projects questions Exams
Sharing
Stanford Algebra
NCLB assessment
Achievement Readiness
Assessments criteria with
Tests Test
students
Teacher Math
Weekly quiz Unit Tests
observation worksheet

Session 1, Formative Assessment


Graphic organizers

Comment only
grading
Session 1, Formative Assessment 1
Non-graded pre-
assessment

Graded pre-
assessments
Session 1, Formative Assessment 2
End of Unit Projects

Homework
Session 1, Formative Assessment 3
NCLB Assessments

Stanford
Achievement Tests
Session 1, Formative Assessment 4
Teacher observation

Weekly quiz
Session 1, Formative Assessment 5
Mid-year exams

Student self
assessment
Session 1, Formative Assessment 6
Non-graded exit
questions

Student work
analysis
Session 1, Formative Assessment 7
Probing questions

Screening Exams
Session 1, Formative Assessment 8
Algebra Readiness
Test

Sharing assessment
criteria with students
Session 1, Formative Assessment 9
Math worksheet

Unit Tests
Session 1, Formative Assessment 10
FORMATIVE
ASSESSMENT
EXAMPLES

NON-EXAMPLES
Session 1, Formative Assessment 11
NOT SURE

Session 1, Formative Assessment 12


Definition/Characteristics: Contexts/mathematical topics in which
proportionality occurs:

Proportionality
Examples of proportional situations: Non-examples of proportional situations:

Difficulties that students might encounter as they solve proportionality


problems:

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC October 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The
Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Warm-up OGAP Proportionality

1) Based on the shape of the graphs below select the graph that
represents a proportional situation.

a) Explain your choice and why the others were not selected.
b) These graphs were intentionally not labeled. Provide three
different situations (contexts) that would fit the graph you
selected. Label the axis given each context (do not put on a
scale).

c) With your table members - select three examples of labeled


graphs and place them on newsprint paper. Be prepared to
describe the situation.

The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
1) Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes
to pack 2 bushels of apples. How many
boxes will she need to pack 8 bushels of
apples? Show all your work for this
problem.

2) Paul’s dog eats 20 pounds of food in 30


days. How long will it take Paul’s dog to
eat a 45 pound bag of dog food? Show all
your work for this problem.

3) Bob’s shower uses 18 gallons of water


every 3 minutes. How many gallons of
water does Bob use if he takes a 13 minute
shower? Show all your work for this
problem.
4) The chart below shows the population of raccoons
in two towns. Karl says that Town A has more
raccoons per square mile. Josh says that Town B
has more raccoons per square mile. Who is right?
Justify
Town A Town B your
60 square miles 40 square miles answer.

480 raccoons 380 raccoons

5) Nate’s shower uses 4 gallons of water per minute.


How much water does Nate use when he takes a 15
minute shower?

6) Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of


pasture. Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125
acres of pasture. Which ranch has more acres of
pasture per horse? Explain your answer using
words, pictures, or diagrams.
3.2 - Structures of Proportiojnality Problems Case Study

Case Study

A sixth grade teacher is starting a unit on proportionality and is reviewing the set of the problems at the end of the chapter to get an
idea of what her students should be able to do by the end of the unit. She notices that there is no instruction on using cross products in
the unit, but there is an emphasis on other strategies to solve proportionality problems.

As she looks at the problems, she thinks some of the problems will be more difficult than the other problems. She decides to sort the
problems into piles to help her think about features of problems she needs to think about as the unit progresses.

Step 1: With a partner sort the problems into three categories – 1) Easiest; 2) Moderate difficulty; 3) Most challenging

Step2: Make notes of features of the problems that would make them more or less challenging for students.

Easiest Moderate Most Challenging


List Problems: List Problems: List Problems:

Features of problems: Features of problems: Features of problems:

1 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number
EHR-0227057) Version 2.0 July 16, 2007
3.2 - Structures of Proportiojnality Problems Case Study

Unit Review

1) Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes will she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?
Show all your work for this problem.

2) Paul’s dog eats 20 pounds of food in 30 days. How long will it take Paul’s dog to eat a 45 pound bag of dog food? Show all your
work for this problem.

3) Bob’s shower uses 18 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 13 minute shower?
Show all your work for this problem.

4) The chart below shows the population of raccoons in two towns.

Town A Town B
60 square miles 40 square miles
480 raccoons 380 raccoons
Karl says that Town A has more raccoons per square mile. Josh says that Town B has more raccoons per square mile. Who is right?
Justify your answer.

5) Nate’s shower uses 4 gallons of water per minute. How much water does Nate use when he takes a 15 minute shower?

6) Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of pasture. Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125 acres of pasture. Which ranch
has more acres of pasture per horse? Explain your answer using words, pictures, or diagrams.

2 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number
EHR-0227057) Version 2.0 July 16, 2007
3A.1 - Multiplicative Relationship Case Study

In this activity you will be reviewing a small sample (n = 6 students) of student


work gathered during an OGAP pilot study conducted in 2006. The pilot was
designed to explore the impact on student solutions of changing the multiplicative
relationship “within” and “between” ratios. As a part of the pilot 150 seventh
grade students solved the three problems below over a one week period. All of the
responses were analyzed.

While the sample doesn’t fully represent all the strategies that were evidenced, it
does provide a lens into the findings that illustrate the impact of changing the
multiplicative relationships as students solved these problems.

[There are two parts to this Case. Part 1 is focused on the problems used in the
study. Part 2 (page 3) is focused on an analysis of student work.]

Part 1:
1) Solve each problem
2) Identify the multiplicative relationship within and between the ratios for
each problem
3) Anticipate difficulties that students might have when solving each problem

Pilot 1

A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new playground are
proportional to the dimensions of the old playground.

Old Playground New Playground

40 ft. 120 ft.

80 ft.

What is the length of the new playground?

1 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) October 2008 v2
3A.1 - Multiplicative Relationship Case Study

Pilot 2

A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new playground


are proportional to the dimensions of the old playground.

Old Playground New Playground

180 ft.
30 ft.

50 ft.

What is the length of the new playground?

Pilot 3

Susan is enlarging her garden. The dimensions of the new garden are
proportional to the dimensions of the old garden.

Old Garden New Garden

7 ft.

13 ft.
19.5 ft.

What is the length of the new garden?

2 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) October 2008 v2
3A.1 - Multiplicative Relationship Case Study

Part 2: Review student work

With a partner review the sets of student work from the study.

1) Indicate if a multiplicative or additive strategy is evidenced in the


student work by placing an X in the cell that corresponds with your
analysis.
2) Complete discussion questions 1 – 3 below after you have completed
the review of student work.

Student Work Analysis:

Pilot 1 Pilot 2 Pilot 3


Multiplicative Additive Multiplicative Additive Multiplicative Additive
Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy
Student 1
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4
Student 5
Student 6
TOTALS

Discussion Questions;

1) What did you see that you expected?

2) What surprised you?

3) What are potential implications for instruction and assessment?

3 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) October 2008 v2
1 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
2 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
3 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
4 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
5 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
6 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
7 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
8 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
9 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
10 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
11 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
12 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
13 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
14 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
15 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
16 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
17 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
18 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) July 17, 2007
3B - Interpreting the Meaning of Quantities Case Study

Part I: The student work below shows four different ways that a student may not be interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the
problem or in the solution. Review the student work and then answer the questions for each response.

Student Response A 1) What is the evidence that the student may not be interpreting the
meaning of the quantities in the problem?

2) Suggest some questions you might ask each student or activities


you might do to help them understand the meaning of the quantities
in the problem and the solution.

1 version 1.0 June 20, 2008 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
3B - Interpreting the Meaning of Quantities Case Study

Student Response B
1) What is the evidence that the student may not be
interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the problem?

2) Suggest some questions you might ask each student or


activities you might do to help them understand the
meaning of the quantities in the problem and the solution.

2 version 1.0 June 20, 2008 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
3B - Interpreting the Meaning of Quantities Case Study

1) What is the evidence that the student may not be


interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the
problem?
Student Response C

2) Suggest some questions you might ask each


students or activities you might do to help them
understand the meaning of the quantities in the
problem and the solution.

3 version 1.0 June 20, 2008 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
3B - Interpreting the Meaning of Quantities Case Study

Student Response D 1) What is the evidence that the student may not be
interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the
problem?

2) Suggest some questions you might ask each


students or activities you might do to help them
understand the meaning of the quantities in the
problem and the solution.

4 version 1.0 June 20, 2008 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
3B - Interpreting the Meaning of Quantities Case Study

Part II: What evidence in the student solution below of the student understanding both the meaning of the quantities in the problem
and the solution?

5 version 1.0 June 20, 2008 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
1 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
2 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
3 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
4 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
5 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
6 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
7 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
8 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
9 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Structures of Proportionality
Problems

Krisan Stone, VMP


Leslie Ercole, VMP
Marge Petit, Marge Petit Consulting
(MPC)

Modified October
2008

Original materials created as a part of the Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment
Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

OGAP Proportionality Framework


Structures of Problems

Mathematical Topics Other Structures


And Contexts

Evidence in Student Work to Inform Instruction

Proportional Transitional Non-proportional Underlying


Strategies Proportional Reasoning Issues, Errors,
Strategies Misconceptions

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

1
Structure of the problems
that students solve

Structure refers to –
how the problems are
built

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

Structures of Proportionality Problems

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, & Stage,


1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

• Context (Heller, Post, & Behr, 1985; Karpus, Polus, & Stage, 1983)
• Types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel & Behr, 1993)
• Meaning of quantities as defined by the
context and the units (Silver, 2006 Vermont meeting; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

2
A Research Finding

When the multiplicative relationships in a


proportional situation are integral, it is easier for
students to solve than when they are non-integral.
(Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993; Karplus, Polus, & Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 5
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

Multiplicative Relationships

Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to


pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes will
she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?

Non-integral Integral
multiplicative multiplicative
relationship
3 boxes x boxes relationship
=
2 bushels 8 bushels

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 6
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

3
Multiplicative Relationships

Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to


pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes will
she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?

Non-integral
multiplicative Integral
relationship multiplicative
relationship

3 boxes 2 bushels
=
x boxes 8 bushels

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 7
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

Multiplicative Relationships

What are the multiplicative


relationships in this
proportional situation?

Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail


order business. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2
bushels of apples. How many boxes will she
need to pack 7 bushels of apples?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 8
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

4
A Research Finding

When the multiplicative relationships in a


proportional situation are both non-integral then
students have more difficulty and often revert
back to non-proportional reasoning and
strategies. (Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993; Karplus, Polus, & Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 9
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002)

Structures of Proportionality Problems

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, & Stage,


1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

• Context (Heller, Post, & Behr, 1985; Karpus, Polus, & Stage, 1983)
• Types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel & Behr, 1993)
• Meaning of quantities as defined by the
context and the units (Silver, 2006 Vermont meeting; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 0

5
Case Study - Multiplicative Relationships
(VMP Pilot Study, Grade 7 Students, n=153)

• Three similar problems administered across a one week period


(Monday, pilot 1; Wednesday, pilot 2; and Friday, pilot 3)
• Main difference between the problems is the multiplicative
relationship within and between figures.

PILOT 1: A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of


the new playground are proportional to the dimensions of the old
playground. What is the length of the new playground?

40 ft.
120 ft.
80 ft.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 1

Student Work Analysis


(n=6 students)
Part 1
• Solve each problem.
• Identify the multiplicative relationship within and between
the figures.
• Anticipate difficulties that students might have when solving
each problem.

Part 2
Discussion with a partner:
• Identify the multiplicative or additive relationship evidenced
in the student response (e.g., x 3, between figures; + 6, within figures).
• Place your analysis in the cell that corresponds with the
student number and pilot number in the table on page 3.
• Complete Discussion Questions on page 3.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 2

6
Multiplicative Relationships Study:
Discussion Questions

• What did you see that you expected?

• What surprised you?

• What are the implications for instruction


and assessment?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 3

OGAP Study Findings


(2006 Pilot, n=153)

Multiplicative Relationships Percent of Correct


within and between figures Responses

Pilot 1 Both integral 80%

Pilot 2 One integral, one non-integral 65%

Pilot 3 Both non-integral 35.5%

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 4

7
Structures of Proportionality Problems

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, & Stage,


1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

• Context (Heller, Post, & Behr, 1985; Karpus, Polus, & Stage, 1983)
• Types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel & Behr, 1993)
• Meaning of quantities as defined by the
context and the units (Silver, 2006 Vermont meeting; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 5

Context Matters

• More familiar contexts tend to be easier for


students than unfamiliar contexts. (Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993)

• How proportionality shows up in different contexts


impacts difficulty. (Harel, & Behr, 1993)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 6

8
Context Matters
Which contexts might be more familiar to students?
How does proportionality show up in these different contexts?

• The scale factor relating two similar rectangles is 1.5. One side of
the larger rectangle is 18 inches. How long is the corresponding
side of the smaller rectangle?

• Nate’s shower uses 4 gallons of water per minute. How much


water does Nate use when he takes a 15 minute shower?

• A 20-ounce box of Toasty Oats costs $3.00. A 15-ounce box of


Toasty Oats costs $2.10. Which box costs less per ounce?
Explain your reasoning.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 7

Structures of Proportionality Problems

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, & Stage,


1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

• Context (Heller, Post, & Behr, 1985; Karpus, Polus, & Stage, 1983)
• Types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel & Behr, 1993)
• Meaning of quantities as defined by the
context and the units (Silver, 2006 Vermont meeting; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 8

9
Types of Problems

• Ratio
• Rate
• Rate and ratio comparisons
• Missing value
• Scale factor
• Qualitative questions
• Non- proportional
OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 1
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 9

Types of Problems

Ratio – is a comparison Rate – A rate is a special


of any two like quantities ratio. Its denominator is
(same unit). always 1.

The ratio of boys to girls is 1:2. $5.00 per hour


The ratio of people with brown $3.00 per pound
eyes to blue eyes is 1:4. 25 horses per acre

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 0

10
Types of Problems: Ratio
Relationships - Part : Part or Part : Whole
Referents - Implied or Explicit
OGAP Proportionality Framework

Dana and Jamie ran for student council president at Midvale Middle School. The
data below represents the voting results for grade 7.

7th Grade Votes


Jamie Dana
Boys 24 40
Girls 49 20

John says that the ratio of the 7th grade boys who voted for Jamie to the 7th
grade students who voted for Jamie is about 1:2. Mary disagreed. Mary says it is
about 1:3. Who is correct? Explain your answer.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 1

Types of Problems: Ratio Missing Value


Relationships - Part : Part or Part : Whole
Referents - Implied or Explicit

There are red and blue marbles in a bag.


The ratio of red marbles to blue marbles is 1:2.
If there are 10 blue marbles in the bag, how
many red marbles are in the bag?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 2

11
Types of Problems: Rate Missing Value

What are the meanings of the quantities in this problem?


What is the meaning of the answer?

Leslie drove at an average speed of 55 mph for 4 hours.


How far did Leslie drive?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 3

Types of Problems: Rate Comparison

What is the general structure of rate comparison problems?

• A 20-ounce box of Toasty Oats costs $3.00. A 15-ounce box


of Toasty Oats costs $2.10. Which box costs less per ounce?
Explain your reasoning.

• Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of pasture.


Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125 acres of pasture.
Which ranch has more acres of pasture per horse? Explain
your answer using words, pictures, or diagrams.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 4

12
Case Study - Meaning of the Quantities
In Part I of this case study, you will analyze 4 student
solutions to Ranch problem. The solutions represent the
kinds of “quantity interpretation” errors that students
make when they solve rate comparison problems.

Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of pasture.


Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125 acres of pasture.
Which ranch has more acres of pasture per horse? Explain
your answer using words, pictures, or diagrams.
October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 5

Case Study - Meaning of the Quantities

In pairs, analyze the student solutions and then respond


to the following.
• What is the evidence that the student may not be
interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the
problem?
• Suggest some questions you might ask each student
or activities you might do to help them understand the
meaning of the quantities in the problem and the
solution.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 6

13
Case Study - Meaning of the Quantities

What evidence is there of


the student’s understanding
of both the meaning of the
quantities in the problem
and in the solution?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 7

Types of Problems: Missing Value

What is the general structure


of a missing value problem?

Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to


pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes
will she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 8

14
A Research Finding
The location of the missing value may affect performance. (Harel, & Behr,1993)

Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order business.


It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples.
How many boxes will she need to pack 7 bushels of apples?

Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order business.


It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. She needs 7
bushels of apples packed. How many boxes will she need?

Internal Structure OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 2
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 9

Research Applications

Paul’s dog eats 15 pounds of food in


18 days. How long will it take Paul’s
dog to eat 45 pound bag of food?

Explain your thinking.

Change this problem to make it


easier, and then harder.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 0

15
Structures of The Problems
A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new
playground are proportional to the old playground. What is the
measurement of the missing length of the new playground?
Show your work.
Old Playground New Playground

90 ft. 110 ft.

630 ft.

What type of problem is


this similarity problem? OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 1

Structures of The Problems

What type of problem is


this similarity problem?

The dimension of 4 rectangles are given


below. Which two rectangles are similar?
• 2” x 8”
• 4” x 10”
• 6” x 12”
• 6” x 15”

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 2

16
Structures of The Problems
What is the general structure of
scale factor problems?

Jack built a scale model of the John Hancock Center. His model was
2.25 feet tall. The John Hancock Center in Chicago is 1476 feet tall.
How many feet of the real building does one foot on the scale model
represent? Be sure to show all of your work.

The scale factor relating two similar rectangles is 1.5.


One side of the larger rectangle is 18 inches. How long
is the corresponding side of the smaller rectangle?

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 3

Structures of The Problems

The scale factor relating two similar rectangles is


1.5. One side of the larger rectangle is 18 inches.
How long is the corresponding side of the smaller
rectangle?

If a student was unable to solve this


problem successfully, what variables
would you change to make it more
accessible? Why?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 4

17
A Research Finding

Students should interact with


qualitative predictive and comparison
questions as they are developing their
proportional reasoning…. (Lamon,1993)

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 5

Types of Problems: Qualitative


Why do you think researchers suggest
these types of problems as important
stepping stones?

• Kim ran more laps than Bob. Kim ran her laps in
less time than Bob ran his laps. Who ran faster?

• If Kim ran fewer laps in more time than she did


yesterday, would her running speed be: A) faster;
B) slower; C) exactly the same; D) not enough
information.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 6

18
A Research Finding

Students need to see examples of


proportional and non-proportional
situations so they can determine when it
is appropriate to use a multiplicative
solution strategy. (Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993)

OGAP Proportionality Framework

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 7

Solve these problems


(Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993)

Sue and Julie were


running equally fast
3 U.S. dollars can be
around a track. Sue
exchanged for 2 British
started first. When she
pounds. How many
had run 9 laps, Julie had
pounds for $21 U.S.
run 3 laps. When Julie
dollars?
completed 15 laps, how
many laps had Sue run?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 8

19
A Research Finding
A Classic Non-proportional Example
(Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993)

Sue and Julie were running equally


fast around a track. Sue Started first.
When she had run 9 laps, Julie had
run 3 laps. When Julie completed 15
laps, how many laps had Sue run?

22 out of 33 undergraduate students


treated this as a proportional relationship.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 3
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 9

A Contrasting Research Finding

Three U.S. dollars can be exchanged for 2 British


pounds. How many pounds for 21 U.S. dollars?

• Same group – 100% solved it correctly


using traditional proportional algorithm.
• No one in the same group could explain
why this is a proportional relationship
while the “running laps” is not.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 0

20
Case Study - Proportional and Non-proportional??
(VMP Pilot Study, ???)

Kim and Bob were running equally fast


around a track. Kim started first. When
she had run 9 laps, Bob had run 3 laps.
When Bob completed 15 laps, how
many laps had Kim run?

Do student work sort!

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 1

Vermont Version Grade 6(n= 82)

Kim and Bob were running equally fast around a track. Kim
started first. When she had run 9 laps, Bob had run 3 laps.
When Bob completed 15 laps, how many laps had Kim run?

• 39/82 (48%) solved as a proportion


• 33/82 (40%) solved as an additive situation
• 10/82 (12%) non-starters

What are the instructional implications?

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 2

21
Elements of a Proportional Structure
That Affect Performance

• Problem types (comparison, missing value, etc.)


• Mathematical topics/contexts (scaling, similarity, etc.)
• Multiplicative relationships (integral or non-integral)
• Meaning of quantities (ratio relationships and ratio referents)
• Type of numbers used (integer vs. non-integer)

No wonder proportions are


tough to teach and learn.

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 3

What Are the Hallmarks of a


Proportional Reasoner?

• Recognizes the nature of proportional relationships,


• Finds an efficient method based on multiplicative reasoning to
solve problems,
• Represents the quantities in the solution with units that reflect
the meaning of the quantities for the problem situation.

Ultimately, a proportional reasoner should not be deterred by


structures, such as context, problem types, the quantities in the
problems. (Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993; Silver, 2006)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 4

22
Activity: Analyzing Pre-Assessment Tasks

Analyze each of the tasks for:


• Problem types
• Mathematical topics/contexts (scaling, similarity, etc.)
• Multiplicative Relationships (integral or non-integral)
• Ratio Relationships (part:whole or part:part) and referents
(implied or implicit - if applicable)
• Type of numbers used (integer or non-integer)
• Internal Structure (parallel or non-parallel)

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 5

General Directions:
Administering the OGAP Pre-assessment

• Administer the pre-assessment and bring a set of 20 to 25 to our


next session
• Calculators are not allowed
• Tips for students
• Time
• Level of teacher assistance
• Do not analyze student work before our next meeting

October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National 4
Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US Department of Education S366A020002) 6

23
MMSTLC 1

4th GRADE LEVEL Math CONTENT EXPECTATIONS


(Rational) NUMBER AND OPERATIONS

Read, interpret and compare decimal fractions

N.ME.04.15 Read and interpret decimals up to two decimal places; relate to money and place value
decomposition.
N.ME.04.16 Know that terminating decimals represents fractions whose denominators are 10,
10 x 10, 10 x 10 x 10, etc., e.g., powers of 10.
N.ME.04.17 Locate tenths and hundredths on a number line.
N.ME.04.18 Read, write, interpret, and compare decimals up to two decimal places.
N.MR.04.19 Write tenths and hundredths in decimal and fraction forms, and know the decimal
equivalents for halves and fourths.
* revised expectations in italics

Understand fractions
N.ME.04.20 Understand fractions as parts of a set of objects.
N.MR.04.21 Explain why equivalent fractions are equal, using models such as fraction strips or the
number line for fractions with denominators of 12 or less, or equal to 100.
N.MR.04.22 Locate fractions with denominators of 12 or less on the number line; include mixed
numbers.*
N.MR.04.23 Understand the relationships among halves, fourths, and eighths and among thirds, sixths,
and twelfths.
N.ME.04.24 Know that fractions of the form mn where m is greater than n, are greater than 1 and are
called improper fractions; locate improper fractions on the number line.*
N.MR.04.25 Write improper fractions as mixed numbers, and understand that a mixed number represents
the number of “wholes” and the part of a whole remaining, e.g., 5/4 = 1 + ! = 1 !.
N.MR.04.26 Compare and order up to three fractions with denominators 2, 4, and 8, and 3, 6, and 12,
including improper fractions and mixed numbers.

Add and subtract fractions


N.MR.04.27 Add and subtract fractions less than 1 with denominators through 12 and/or 100, in cases
where the denominators are equal or when one denominator is a multiple of the other, e.g.,
1/12 +5/12 = 6/12; 1/6 + 5/12 = 7/12; 3/10 – 23/100 = 7100 . *
N.MR.04.28 Solve contextual problems involving sums and differences for fractions where one
denominator is a multiple of the other (denominators 2 through 12, and 100).*
N.MR.04.29 Find the value of an unknown in equations such 1/8 + x = 5/8 or
! - y = "*.

Multiply fractions by whole numbers


N.MR.04.30 Multiply fractions by whole numbers, using repeated addition and area or array models.

Add and subtract decimal fractions


N.MR.04.31 For problems that use addition and subtraction of decimals through hundredths,
represent with mathematical statements and solve.*
N.FL.04.32 Add and subtract decimals through hundredths.*
Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde
Grade 4
MMSTLC 2

Multiply and divide decimal fractions


N.FL.04.33 Multiply and divide decimals up to two decimal places by a one-digit whole number where the
result is a terminating decimal, e.g., 0.42 ÷ 3 = 0.14, but not 5 ÷ 3 = 1.6.

5th GRADE LEVEL Math CONTENT EXPECTATIONS


Understand meaning of decimal fractions and percentages
N.ME.05.08 Understand the relative magnitude of ones, tenths, and hundredths and the relationship of
each place value to the place to its right, e.g., one is 10 tenths, one tenth is 10 hundredths.
N.ME.05.09 Understand percentages as parts out of 100, use % notation, and express a part of a whole
as a percentage.

Understand fractions as division statements; find equivalent fractions


N.ME.05.10 Understand a fraction as a statement of division, e.g., 2 ÷ 3 = 2/3 , using simple fractions and
pictures to represent.
N.ME.05.11 Given two fractions, e.g., and , express them as fractions with a common
denominator, but not necessarily a least common denominator, e.g., !=4/8 and " = 6/8 ; use
denominators less than 12 or factors of 100.*

Multiply and divide fractions


N.ME.05.12 Find the product of two unit fractions with small denominators using an area model.*
N.MR.05.13 Divide a fraction by a whole number and a whole number by a fraction, using simple unit
fractions.*

Add and subtract fractions using common denominators


N.FL.05.14 Add and subtract fractions with unlike denominators through 12 and/or 100, using the
common denominator that is the product of the denominators of the 2 fractions, e.g., 3/8 + 7/10; use 80
as the common denominator.*

Multiply and divide by powers of ten


N.MR.05.15 Multiply a whole number by powers of 10: 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100, 1,000; and identify patterns.
N.FL.05.16 Divide numbers by 10!s, 100!s, 1,000!s using mental strategies.
N.MR.05.17 Multiply one-digit and two-digit whole numbers by decimals up to two decimal places.

Solve applied problems with fractions


N.FL.05.18 Use mathematical statements to represent an applied situation involving addition and
subtraction of fractions.*
N.MR.05.19 Solve contextual problems that involve finding sums and differences of fractions with unlike
denominators using knowledge of equivalent fractions.*
N.FL.05.20 Solve applied problems involving fractions and decimals; include rounding of answers and
checking reasonableness.*
N.MR.05.21 Solve for the unknown in equations such as # + x = 7/12.*

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC 3

Express, interpret, and use ratios; find equivalences


N.MR.05.22 Express fractions and decimals as percentages and vice versa.
N.ME.05.23 Express ratios in several ways given applied situations, e.g., 3 cups to 5 people, 3 : 5, 3/5 ;
recognize and find equivalent ratios.

Sixth Grade
Work with number is essentially completed by the end of sixth grade, where students’
knowledge of whole numbers and fractions (ratios of whole numbers, with non-zero
denominators) should be introduced to integers and rational numbers. All of the number
emphasis is intended to lay a foundation for the algebra expectations that are included in
grade six. Students should use variables, write simple expressions and equations, and graph
linear relationships. In geometry, students continue to expand their repertoire about shapes
and their properties.

NUMBER AND OPERATIONS

Multiply and divide fractions


N.MR.06.01 Understand division of fractions as the inverse of multiplication, e.g.,
if 4/5 ÷ 2/3 = ! , then 2/3 • = 4/5, so = 4/5 • 3/2 = 12/10. [Core]
N.FL.06.02 Given an applied situation involving dividing fractions, write a mathematical
statement to represent the situation. [Core]
N.MR.06.03 Solve for the unknown in equations such as: 1/4 ÷ = 1, 3/4 ÷ = 1/4, and
1/2 = 1 • . [Fut]
N.FL.06.04 Multiply and divide any two fractions, including mixed numbers, fluently. [Core
– NC]

Represent rational numbers as fractions or decimals


N.ME.06.05 Order rational numbers and place them on the number line. [Ext]
N.ME.06.06 Represent rational numbers as fractions or terminating decimals when
possible, and translate between these representations. [Ext]
N.ME.06.07 Understand that a fraction or a negative fraction is a quotient of two integers,
e.g., - 8/3 is -8 divided by 3. [Fut]

Add and subtract integers and rational numbers


N.MR.06.08 Understand integer subtraction as the inverse of integer addition. Understand
integer division as the inverse of integer multiplication. [Fut]
N.FL.06.09 Add and multiply integers between -10 and 10; subtract and divide integers
using the related facts. Use the number line and chip models for addition and subtraction.
[Fut – NC]
N.FL.06.10 Add, subtract, multiply and divide positive rational numbers fluently.
[Core – NC]

Find equivalent ratios


N.ME.06.11 Find equivalent ratios by scaling up or scaling down. [Core]

Solve decimal, percentage and rational number problems


N.FL.06.12 Calculate part of a number given the percentage and the number. [Ext – NC]
N.MR.06.13 Solve contextual problems involving percentages such as sales taxes and tips.

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC 4

[Core]
N.FL.06.14 For applied situations, estimate the answers to calculations involving
operations with rational numbers. [Core]
N.FL.06.15 Solve applied problems that use the four operations with appropriate
decimal numbers. [Core]

ALGEBRA

Calculate rates
A.P A.06.01 Solve applied problems involving rates, including speed, e.g., if a car is going
50 mph, how far will it go in 3 1/2 hours? [Core]

Understand the coordinate plane


A.RP.06.02 Plot ordered pairs of integers and use ordered pairs of integers to identify
points in all four quadrants of the coordinate plane. [Core]

Use variables, write expressions and equations, and combine like terms
A.FO.06.03 Use letters, with units, to represent quantities in a variety of contexts, e.g., y
lbs., k minutes, x cookies. [Core]
A.FO.06.04 Distinguish between an algebraic expression and an equation. [Ext]
A.FO.06.05 Use standard conventions for writing algebraic expressions, e.g., 2x + 1
means “two times x, plus 1” and 2(x + 1) means “two times the quantity (x + 1).” [Fut]
A.FO.06.06 Represent information given in words using algebraic expressions and
equations. [Core]
A.FO.06.07 Simplify expressions of the first degree by combining like terms, and evaluate
using specific values. [Fut]

Represent linear functions using tables, equations, and graphs


A.RP.06.08 Understand that relationships between quantities can be suggested by graphs
and tables. [Ext]

A.P A.06.09 Solve problems involving linear functions whose input values are integers;
write the equation; graph the resulting ordered pairs of integers, e.g., given c chairs, the
“leg function” is 4c; if you have 5 chairs, how many legs?; if you have 12 legs, how many
chairs? [Fut]
A.RP.06.10 Represent simple relationships between quantities using verbal descriptions,
formulas or equations, tables, and graphs, e.g., perimeter-side relationship for a square,
distance-time graphs, and conversions such as feet to inches. [Fut]

Solve equations
A.FO.06.11 Relate simple linear equations with integer coefficients, e.g., 3x = 8 or
x + 5 = 10, to particular contexts and solve. [Core]
A.FO.06.12 Understand that adding or subtracting the same number to both sides of an
equation creates a new equation that has the same solution. [Core]
A.FO.06.13 Understand that multiplying or dividing both sides of an equation by the same
non-zero number creates a new equation that has the same solutions. [Core]
A.FO.06.14 Solve equations of the form ax + b = c, e.g., 3x + 8 = 15 by hand for positive
integer coefficients less than 20, use calculators otherwise, and interpret the results. [Fut]

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC 5

Seventh Grade

The main focus in grade seven is the algebra concept of linear relationships, including ideas
about proportional relationships. Students should understand the relationship of equations
to their graphs, as well as to tables and contextual situation for linear functions. In addition,
work in algebra extends into simplifying and solving simple expressions and equations. The
main concept from geometry in grade seven is similarity of polygons, which also draws on
ideas about proportion. Students apply their understanding of ratio in data-based situations.

NUMBER AND OPERATIONS

Understand derived quantities


N.MR.07.02 Solve problems involving derived quantities such as density, velocity, and
weighted averages. [Fut]

Understand and solve problems involving rates, ratios, and proportions


N.FL.07.03 Calculate rates of change including speed. [Core]
N.MR.07.04 Convert ratio quantities between different systems of units, such as feet per
second to miles per hour. [Core]
N.FL.07.05 Solve proportion problems using such methods as unit rate, scaling, finding
equivalent fractions, and solving the proportion equation a/b = c/d; know how to see
patterns about proportional situations in tables. [Core]

Compute with rational numbers


N.FL.07.07 Solve problems involving operations with integers. [Core]
N.FL.07.08 Add, subtract, multiply, and divide positive and negative rational numbers
fluently. [Core – NC]
N.FL.07.09 Estimate results of computations with rational numbers. [Core – NC]

ALGEBRA

Understand and apply directly proportional relationships and relate to linear


relationships
A.P A.07.01 Recognize when information given in a table, graph, or formula suggests a
directly proportional or linear relationship. [Fut]
A.RP.07.02 Represent directly proportional and linear relationships using verbal
descriptions, tables, graphs, and formulas, and translate among these representations.
[Core]
A.P A.07.03 Given a directly proportional or other linear situation, graph and interpret the
slope and intercept(s) in terms of the original situation; evaluate y = mx + b for specific x
values, e.g., weight vs. volume of water, base cost plus cost per unit. [Fut]
A.P A.07.04 For directly proportional or linear situations, solve applied problems using
graphs and equations, e.g., the heights and volume of a container with uniform cross-
section; height of water in a tank being filled at a constant rate; degrees Celsius and
degrees Fahrenheit; distance and time under constant speed. [Core]
A.P A.07.05 Recognize and use directly proportional relationships of the form y = mx, and
distinguish from linear relationships of the form y = mx + b, b non-zero; understand that in
a directly proportional relationship between two quantities one quantity is a constant
multiple of the other quantity. [Fut]

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC 6

Understand and represent linear functions


A.P A.07.06 Calculate the slope from the graph of a linear function as the ratio of
“rise/run” for a pair of points on the graph, and express the answer as a fraction and a
decimal; understand that linear functions have slope that is a constant rate of change.
[Fut]
A.P A.07.07 Represent linear functions in the form y = x + b, y = mx, and y = mx + b,
and graph, interpreting slope and y-intercept. [Fut]
A.FO.07.08 Find and interpret the x- and/or y-intercepts of a linear equation or function.
Know that the solution to a linear equation of the form ax + b=0 corresponds to the point at
which the graph of y = ax+ b crosses the x-axis. [Fut]

Understand and solve problems about inversely proportional relationships


A.P A.07.09 Recognize inversely proportional relationships in contextual situations; know
that quantities are inversely proportional if their product is constant, e.g., the length and
width of a rectangle with fixed area, and that an inversely proportional relationship is of the
form y = k/x where k is some non-zero number. [Fut]
A.RP.07.10 Know that the graph of y = k/x is not a line, know its shape, and know that it
crosses neither the x- nor the y-axis. [Fut]

Apply basic properties of real numbers in algebraic contexts


A.P A.07.11 Understand and use basic properties of real numbers: additive and
multiplicative identities, additive and multiplicative inverses, commutativity, associativity,
and the distributive property of multiplication over addition. [Core]

Combine algebraic expressions and solve equations


A.FO.07.12 Add, subtract, and multiply simple algebraic expressions of the first degree,
e.g., (92x + 8y) – 5x + y, or x(x+2) and justify using properties of real numbers. [Core]
A.FO.07.13 From applied situations, generate and solve linear equations of the form ax +
b = c and ax + b = cx + d, and interpret solutions. [Fut]

Solve problems
N.MR.08.07 Understand percent increase and percent decrease in both sum and product form, e.g., 3%
increase of a quantity x is x + .03x = 1.03x.
N.MR.08.08 Solve problems involving percent increases and decreases.
N.FL.08.09 Solve problems involving compounded interest or multiple discounts.
N.MR.08.10 Calculate weighted averages such as course grades, consumer price indices, and sports
ratings.
N.FL.08.11 Solve problems involving ratio units, such as miles per hour, dollars per pound, or persons
per square mile.*
• revised expectations in italics

Understand the concept of non-linear functions using basic examples


A.RP.08.01 Identify and represent linear functions, quadratic functions, and other simple functions
including inversely proportional relationships (y = k/x); cubics (y = ax3); roots (y = !x ); and exponentials
(y = ax , a > 0); using tables, graphs, and equations.*
A.PA.08.02 For basic functions, e.g., simple quadratics, direct and indirect variation, and population
growth, describe how changes in one variable affect the others.
A.PA.08.03 Recognize basic functions in problem context, e.g., area of a circle is "r2, volume of a
sphere is "r3, and represent them using tables, graphs, and formulas.
A.RP.08.04 Use the vertical line test to determine if a graph represents a function in one variable.

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC 7

Understand and represent quadratic functions


A.RP.08.05 Relate quadratic functions in factored form and vertex form to their graphs, and vice versa;
in particular, note that solutions of a quadratic equation are the x-intercepts of the corresponding
quadratic function.
A.RP.08.06 Graph factorable quadratic functions, finding where the graph intersects the x-axis and the
coordinates of the vertex; use words “parabola” and “roots”; include functions in vertex form and those
with leading coefficient –1, e.g., y = x2 – 36, y = (x – 2)2 – 9; y = – x2; y = – (x – 3)2.

Recognize, represent, and apply common formulas


A.FO.08.07 Recognize and apply the common formulas:
(a + b)2 = a2 + 2 ab + b2
(a – b)2 = a2 – 2 ab + b2
(a + b) (a – b) = a2 – b2 ; represent geometrically.
A.FO.08.08 Factor simple quadratic expressions with integer coefficients, e.g., x2 + 6x + 9, x2 + 2x – 3,
and x2 – 4; solve simple quadratic equations, e.g., x2 = 16 or x2 = 5 (by taking square roots);
x2 – x – 6 = 0, x2 – 2x = 15 (by factoring); verify solutions by evaluation.
A.FO.08.09 Solve applied problems involving simple quadratic equations.

Understand solutions and solve equations, simultaneous equations, and linear


inequalities
A.FO.08.10 Understand that to solve the equation f(x) = g(x) means to find all values of x for which the
equation is true, e.g., determine whether a given value, or values from a given set, is a solution of an
equation (0 is a solution of 3x2 + 2 = 4x + 2, but 1 is not a solution).
A.FO.08.11 Solve simultaneous linear equations in two variables by graphing, by substitution, and by
linear combination; estimate solutions using graphs; include examples with no solutions and infinitely
many solutions.
A.FO.08.12 Solve linear inequalities in one and two variables, and graph the solution sets.
A.FO.08.13 Set up and solve applied problems involving simultaneous linear equations and linear
inequalities.
* revised expectations in italics.

Each expectation is labeled [Core], [Ext] (Extended Core), [Fut] (Future Core) or [NASL] (Not
Assessed at the State Level); NC designates a Non-Calculator item

Michigan Department of Education www.michigan.gov/mde


Grade 4
MMSTLC Session 17.5 SVSU 12/04/08

Scan Across a Unit and a Year


Step 1: Review the table of contents of your mathematics program. Highlight the
proportionality topics/contexts on the OGAP Proportionality Framework (use the copy
attached) that are addressed in your mathematics program.

Step 2: Select a MAJOR unit that focuses on developing proportional reasoning. Scan the
unit and then highlight the structures evidenced in the problems across the unit. Indicate
multiple hits on a structure with tic marks.

Particularly look for:

• Mathematical topics and contexts


• Problem types
• Multiplicative relationships
• Internal structures
• For ratio problems – Referents (implied vs. explicit)
• Numbers
• Representations

Step 3: Given the GLECS at your grade level and the OGAP Framework answer the
following questions.
1) What surprised you?

2) In what ways does your program support the GLECS at your grade level? In what
ways does your program support the OGAP Framework Problem Structures?

3) In what ways does the unit (s) you reviewed provide opportunities for students to
solve different types of problems with varying problem structures?

4) What gaps, if any, did you find between your program and the OGAP Framework
Problem Structures?

• A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The
Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) November 2008
• Progam Review Task page 1 of 3
MMSTLC Session 17.5 SVSU 12/04/08

STEP 4:

1) Join the other groups at your grade and program and complete the flip chart paper
provided to you. Place your completed chart on the wall with the charts for other
grades and your program.

(Note: We will come back to these analyses after you have analyzed the student work from
the OGAP pre-assessment that you administered to your students. At that point you will
know what strategies your students used to solve the problems and how problem structures
did or did not affect their solution path.)

• A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The
Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) November 2008
• Progam Review Task page 2 of 3
Evidence in Student Work
to Inform Instruction
Leslie Ercole, VMP
Susan Ojala, VMI
Amy Johnson, Milton Elementary School
Marge Petit, Marge Petit Consulting (MPC)
Bob Laird, VMP
Krisan Stone, VMP
Ted Marsden, Norwich University

1 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

OGAP Proportionality Framework


Structures
of Problems

Mathematical Other
Topics And Structures
Contexts

Evidence in Student
Work to Inform Instruction

Proportional Transitional Non-proportional Underlying


Strategies Proportional Reasoning Issues, Errors,
Strategies Misconceptions

2 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

1
Different Structures Effect
Student’s Reasoning

Pilot 1

Pilot 3

3 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Why is it important to know about


the strategies students use in
proportional situations?
• To support attainment of procedural fluency
• Procedural fluency “refers to the knowledge of procedures,
knowledge of when and how to use them appropriately, and skill in
performing them flexibly, accurately and efficiently.” (Adding It
Up! NRC (2000))
• To inform instruction
• Understanding students’ strategies – as they interact with problems
with different structures - helps teachers move students towards
procedural fluency.
• Ultimately, a proportional reasoner should not be influenced by
context, problem types, the multiplicative relationships, the
quantities in the problems and their associated units, or numerical
complexity (Cramer, Post & Currier, 1993)
4 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

2
OGAP Student Work
Disclaimer
• The primary purpose of the student work used
during this training is to help you recognize the
kinds of evidences found in student work when
students solve proportionality problems.
• For these purposes we will take the evidence in
the student work at face value :
• Understanding that an interview with a
student might reveal additional evidences.
• Understanding that the student might not
have shown all their thinking.
5 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Proportional Reasoning

Non-proportional Transitional Proportional


Reasoning Proportional Strategies
Strategies

6 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

3
Proportional Reasoning

Non-proportional Transitional
Reasoning Proportional
Strategies

• Guesses or uses random application of numbers,


operations, or strategies
• Uses additive reasoning
• Uses whole number reasoning
• Solves a non-proportional situation proportionally
• Misinterprets vocabulary and related concept
(e.g., ratio, similarity)

7 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Non-proportional Reasoning
Bob’s shower uses 14 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 8 minute
shower? Show all your work for this problem.

8 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

4
Non-proportional Reasoning
The chart below shows the
population of raccoons in two
towns.

Town A Town B
60 square miles 40 square miles
480 raccoons 360 raccoons

Karl says that Town A has more


raccoons per square mile. Josh
says that Town B has more
raccoons per square mile. Who is
right? Justify your answer.

9 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Non-proportional Reasoning
Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order business.
It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. How many
boxes will she need to pack 7 bushes of apples?

10 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

5
Non-proportional Reasoning

11 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Non-proportional Reasoning
Kim and Bob were running equally fast around a track. Kim
started first. When she had run 9 laps, Bob had run 3 laps.
When Bob had run 15 laps, how many laps had Kim run?
Explain your reasoning.

12 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

6
Proportional Reasoning

Proportional
Strategies

• Finds and applies unit rate to situation


• Compares simplified fractions, rates, or ratios
• Applies multiplication relationships
• Sets up a proportion and uses cross products
• Uses y = kx (either symbolic or graphic)
• Applies the correct ratio referent when solving a
problem involving ratios
• Other
13 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Proportional Reasoning
Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order business.
It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. How many
boxes will she need to pack 8 bushes of apples?

14 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

7
Proportional Strategies
Bob’s shower uses 18 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 13 minute
shower? Show all your work for this problem.

15 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Proportional Strategies
Bob’s shower uses 18 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 13 minute
shower? Show all your work for this problem.

16 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

8
Proportional Strategies
There are red and blue marbles in a bag. The ratio of red
marbles to blue marbles in a bag is 1:2. Sue opened the bag
and found 12 red marbles. How many marbles are in the bag
altogether? Explain your thinking.

17 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Proportional Strategies
Bob’s shower uses 14 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 8 minute
shower?

18 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

9
Proportional Strategies
The dimensions of 4 rectangles are given below. Which 2
rectangles are similar?

19 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Proportional Strategies
The dimensions of 4 rectangles are given below.
Which 2 rectangles are similar?

20 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

10
Proportional Reasoning

Transitional
Proportional
Strategies

• Builds up/down
• Finds equivalent fractions/ratios with an
error
• Uses models
• Makes a cross product error
• Makes an error in applying a multiplicative
relationship
• Other
21 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Transitional Proportional
Strategies
Bob’s shower uses 14 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How many
gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 8 minute shower? Show all
your work for this problem.

22 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

11
Transitional Proportional
Strategies
Paul’s dog eats 20 pounds of food in 30 days. How long will it take
Paul’s dog to eat a 45 pound bag of dog food? Explain your thinking.

23 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Transitional Proportional
Strategies
The two rectangles are similar. What is the length of Rectangle B?
Rectangle A Rectangle B

4 in.
6 in. 12 in.

• x

24 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

12
Transitional Proportional
Strategies
Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order business. It takes
3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes will she need to
pack 7 bushes of apples?

25 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Underlying Issues, Errors,


or Misconceptions
• Error in application of cross products

• Uses additive rather than multiplicative strategies

• Misinterprets the meaning of the quantities

• Remainders are not treated correctly

• Units inconsistent or absent

• Error in equation

• Computational error

• Rounding error

• Uses incorrect ratio referent

26 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

13
Underlying Issues and Concerns
The chart below shows the
population of raccoons in two towns.

Town A Town B
60 square miles 40 square miles
480 raccoons 360 raccoons

Karl says that Town A has more


raccoons per square mile. Josh says
that Town B has more raccoons per
square mile. Who is right? Justify
your answer.

27 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Underlying Issues and Concerns


There are red and blue marbles in a bag. The ratio of red marbles
to blue marbles in a bag is 1:2. Sue opened the bag and found 12
marbles. How many marbles are in the bag altogether?
Explain your thinking.

28 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

14
Underlying Issues and Concerns
Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of pasture. Jefferson
Ranch raises 75 horses on 125 acres of pasture. Which ranch has more
acres of pasture per horse? Explain your answer using words, pictures,
or diagrams.

29 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Underlying Issues and Concerns


Bob’s shower uses 14 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 8 minute
shower? Show all your work for this problem.

30 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

15
Underlying Issues and Concerns
Bob’s shower uses 14 gallons of water every 3 minutes. How
many gallons of water does Bob use if he takes a 8 minute
shower? Show all your work for this problem.

31 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

Student Work Sort

• Bob’s Shower
• Raccoons

32 Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP) funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)

16
MMSTLC Session 17.7 SVSU 12/4/08

Evidence in Student Work to Inform Instruction

In this activity you wlll be using the OGAP Framework to help describe evidence
in over 20 student solutions to problems that you have encountered in previous
OGAP work.

Questions to keep in mind:


• What is the solution strategy that the student used?
• What is the evidence of that strategy?
• What structure (s) in the problem facilitated the use of a proportional
strategy or may have resulted in a student using either a transitional or
non-proportional strategy?
• What might your next instructional/assessment step be given the student
solution? (e.g., what evidence of understanding can be built on? What
else do you need to know to help make decisions about the next
instructional step? What questions can you ask to build on understanding?
What activities or models can be used?)

There are some underlying assumptions when asking about next


instruction steps:
• A student solution usually provides evidence of understanding that can be
built upon;
• One might need to collect additional information about the student
understanding as a part of the next step;
• While you are identifying next instructional steps in response to one
student response in this activity, these evidences are common across
classrooms. So when you answer questions about individual pieces of
student work in this activity think about this being an example of common
errors across groups of students that can be applied to full classrooms of
students.
• Even when a student correctly solves a problem, there are instructional
next steps to consider.

Important Note: The purpose of reviewing this work is NOT to spend time to
reliably agree about the evidences, but to give us a way to describe the evidence
that will inform instruction.

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
8.4 A Student Work Bob's Shower

Student 1

1 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 2

2 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 3

3 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 4

4 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 5

5 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 6

6 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 7

7 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 8

8 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 9

9 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 10

10 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 11

11 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 12

12 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 13

13 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
8.5 A Student Work Raccoons

Student 1

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
1 These materials
Mathematics werefunded
Partnership createdby
byathe Vermont
grant Mathematics
provided by the US Partnership
Department funded by a grant
of Education provided
(Award by the
Number US Department
S366A020002) andofthe
NationalEducation (Award Number
Science Foundation (AwardS366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Number EHR-0227057)
Student 2

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the
2 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 3

4 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 4

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
5 ThesePartnership
Mathematics funded
materials were by a by
created grant
theprovided
Vermont by the US Department
Mathematics of Education
Partnership funded by a(Award Numberby
grant provided S366A020002) and theof
the US Department
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 5

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
6 These materials
Mathematics Partnership
werefunded
createdbybya the
grant provided
Vermont by the US Department
Mathematics Partnership of Education
funded (Award
by a grant Number
provided S366A020002)
by the andofthe
US Department
NationalEducation
Science Foundation (AwardS366A020002)
(Award Number Number EHR-0227057)
and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 6

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
Mathematics Partnership
7 These materials funded
were by by
created a grant providedMathematics
the Vermont by the US Department
Partnershipoffunded
Education (Award
by a grant Number
provided byS366A020002) and the
the US Department of
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 7

8 These materials were created by the Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of
Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 8

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
9 ThesePartnership
Mathematics funded
materials were by a grant
created by theprovided
Vermontby the US Department
Mathematics of Education
Partnership funded by a(Award Number by
grant provided S366A020002) and theof
the US Department
National Science Foundation
Education (Award(Award
NumberNumber EHR-0227057)
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
Student 9

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
12 ThesePartnership
Mathematics materials were created
funded by theprovided
by a grant VermontbyMathematics Partnership
the US Department funded by a(Award
of Education grant provided
Number by the US Department
S366A020002) and theof
National Science Foundation
Education (Award (Award
NumberNumber EHR-0227057)
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
MMSTLC Session 17.8 OGAP Proportional Reasoning Item Analysis Sheet
Item Background:
Proportional Strategies Transitional Proportional Strategies Non-proportional Strategies
Description of evidence to inform Description of evidence to inform instruction: Description of evidence to inform instruction:
instruction: • Guesses or uses random application of numbers,
• Builds up/down operations, or strategies
• Finds and applies unit rate to situation
• Finds equivalent fractions/ratios with an error • Uses additive reasoning
• Compares simplified fractions, rates, or
ratios • Uses whole number reasoning
• Uses models
• Applies multiplicative relationship • Solves a non-proportional situation proportionally

• Makes a cross product error • Misunderstands vocabulary and related concept (e.g.
• Sets up a proportion and uses cross ratio, similarity)
products
• Makes an error in applying a multiplicative • Not enough information to determine/lacks
• Uses y=mx relationship supporting evidence

• Other • Other • No attempt


For ratio problems:
• Applies the correct ratio referent • Other

Underlying Concerns/Errors
Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions: Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions:
• Error in equation
• Error in the application of cross products
• Uses incorrect ratio referent
• Uses additive strategies rather than multiplicative strategy (e.g., uses
repeated addition instead of multiplication) • Other

• Units inconsistent or absent Computational errors in student solutions:


• Misinterprets the meaning of the quantities • Computational error
• Remainders are not treated correctly
• Rounding errors

Instructional Notes:

The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-
0227057) November 21, 2008
MMSTLC Session 17.8 OGAP Proportional Reasoning Item Analysis Sheet
Item Background:
Proportional Strategies Transitional Proportional Strategies Non-proportional Strategies
Description of evidence to inform Description of evidence to inform instruction: Description of evidence to inform instruction:
instruction: • Guesses or uses random application of numbers,
• Builds up/down operations, or strategies
• Finds and applies unit rate to situation
• Finds equivalent fractions/ratios with an error • Uses additive reasoning
• Compares simplified fractions, rates, or
ratios • Uses whole number reasoning
• Uses models
• Applies multiplicative relationship • Solves a non-proportional situation proportionally

• Makes a cross product error • Misunderstands vocabulary and related concept (e.g.
• Sets up a proportion and uses cross ratio, similarity)
products
• Makes an error in applying a multiplicative • Not enough information to determine/lacks
• Uses y=mx relationship supporting evidence

• Other • Other • No attempt


For ratio problems:
• Applies the correct ratio referent • Other

Underlying Concerns/Errors
Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions: Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions:
• Error in equation
• Error in the application of cross products
• Uses incorrect ratio referent
• Uses additive strategies rather than multiplicative strategy (e.g., uses
repeated addition instead of multiplication) • Other

• Units inconsistent or absent Computational errors in student solutions:


• Misinterprets the meaning of the quantities • Computational error
• Remainders are not treated correctly
• Rounding errors

Instructional Notes:

The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-
0227057) November 21, 2008
MMSTLC Session 17.8 SVSU 12/4/08

The OGAP Student Work Sort Process


There are three steps to the OGAP Student Work Sort Process. For a single
question:

STEP 1: Review and then sort the work for the class into three piles consistent
with the OGAP Proportionality Framework.

Proportional Strategies Transitional Proportional Non-Proportional

STEP 2: Record the evidence on an OGAP Item Analysis Sheet by piles.


We suggest starting with the Proportional Strategy pile of student work first and
then repeat the process for each of the other piles.
A) Record the strategy (you may want to sub sort the work first (e.g., All that
use multiplicative relationships, or unit rate) by placing the students’ #s (in
your case name, initials) that corresponds with the strategy.
B) Record any underlying issues, errors, or misconceptions evidenced
in the work by placing the students’ #s (in your case name, initials) that
corresponds with the error et al.

Student 1
1

Student 1

STEP 3: In the “Instructional notes section or on the back make some quick
notes about trends in the class or instructional ideas that you may have after
reviewing the work.

A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The Vermont
Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the
National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
9.2 Analyzing Pre-assessment Participant Directions

Goals:
• To gather evidence about strategies your students’ use when they solve
proportionality problems to inform instruction and unit planning.
• To gather evidence about any underlying issues, errors, or misconceptions found
in student pre-assessments to inform instruction and unit planning.

Materials Needed:
• 5 OGAP Proportionality Item Analysis Sheets per person stapled together (9.4)
• The Pre-assessment Analysis Directions(9.2)
• Telling the Story (9.3)
• Completed student pre-assessments

Part I: Analyzing student work and collecting evidence on OGAP Item Analysis
Sheets (2.5 hours)

In General: You will analyze each item across all your students, NOT across a student.
As with the practice in the last session you will NOT grade or score the student
responses from the pre-assessment, but will collect descriptive information on the
OGAP Item Analysis Sheet that will be used to inform instruction and unit planning.

Suggested order for analyzing pre-assessments: Please analyze items in the order
suggested below. You can see that we suggest first analyzing the rate/ratio comparison
problems, then the missing value problems, and then other item types.
Order Grade 6 Item Type Grade 7 Item Type
1 Raccoons Rate comparison Big Horn Ranch Rate comparison
2 Car traveled Rate comparison Similarity Ratio comparison
3 Bob’s Shower Missing value Paul’s Dog Missing value
4 Marbles Ratio Bob’s Shower Missing value
5 Sherwood Forest Qualitative Kim and Bob Non-proportional

As you analyze each item we suggest the following:


1) Make notes about the structures of the problem that might influence student
solutions on the fist line of an OGAP Item Analysis Sheet.

1 A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The
Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002)
and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
9.2 Analyzing Pre-assessment Participant Directions

2) Complete the OGAP Sort and collect evidence in the OGAP Item Analysis Sheet.
IMPORTANT: We suggest that you actually put the students’ initials on the item
analysis sheets. That way you won’t loose important individual student data as
you analyze items across the classroom of students.

3) Write comments on the “Instructional Notes” section of the OGAP Item Analysis
Sheet before moving onto the analysis of the next item.

Complete analysis of all five items in this way.

Part II: Telling the Story

After you complete the analysis of all the items in the pre-assessment address these three
questions on the Telling the Story template (9.3).
1) What are some strategies evidenced in the student work that you can build upon?
2) What are some underlying issues or concerns evidenced in the student work?
3) What are some implications for instruction?
You will use the information from this activity in the next session as you do unit
planning.

Part III: Telling the story across grades

1) Return to your school level team. In a round robin have each teacher “Tell the
Story” for the group of students that they analyzed their pre-assessments (about 5
minutes each).
2) Be prepared to discuss general observations, findings, and implications for your
school.

2 A derivative OGAP product created for MMSTLC November 2008. Original materials were developed as a part of The
Vermont Mathematics Partnership funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002)
and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
MMSTLC Session 17.8 OGAP Proportional Reasoning Item Analysis Sheet
Item Background:
Proportional Strategies Transitional Proportional Strategies Non-proportional Strategies
Description of evidence to inform Description of evidence to inform instruction: Description of evidence to inform instruction:
instruction: • Guesses or uses random application of numbers,
• Builds up/down operations, or strategies
• Finds and applies unit rate to situation
• Finds equivalent fractions/ratios with an error • Uses additive reasoning
• Compares simplified fractions, rates, or
ratios • Uses whole number reasoning
• Uses models
• Applies multiplicative relationship • Solves a non-proportional situation proportionally

• Makes a cross product error • Misunderstands vocabulary and related concept (e.g.
• Sets up a proportion and uses cross ratio, similarity)
products
• Makes an error in applying a multiplicative • Not enough information to determine/lacks
• Uses y=mx relationship supporting evidence

• Other • Other • No attempt


For ratio problems:
• Applies the correct ratio referent • Other

Underlying Concerns/Errors
Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions: Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions:
• Error in equation
• Error in the application of cross products
• Uses incorrect ratio referent
• Uses additive strategies rather than multiplicative strategy (e.g., uses
repeated addition instead of multiplication) • Other

• Units inconsistent or absent Computational errors in student solutions:


• Misinterprets the meaning of the quantities • Computational error
• Remainders are not treated correctly
• Rounding errors

Instructional Notes:

The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-
0227057) November 21, 2008
MMSTLC Session 17.8 OGAP Proportional Reasoning Item Analysis Sheet
Item Background:
Proportional Strategies Transitional Proportional Strategies Non-proportional Strategies
Description of evidence to inform Description of evidence to inform instruction: Description of evidence to inform instruction:
instruction: • Guesses or uses random application of numbers,
• Builds up/down operations, or strategies
• Finds and applies unit rate to situation
• Finds equivalent fractions/ratios with an error • Uses additive reasoning
• Compares simplified fractions, rates, or
ratios • Uses whole number reasoning
• Uses models
• Applies multiplicative relationship • Solves a non-proportional situation proportionally

• Makes a cross product error • Misunderstands vocabulary and related concept (e.g.
• Sets up a proportion and uses cross ratio, similarity)
products
• Makes an error in applying a multiplicative • Not enough information to determine/lacks
• Uses y=mx relationship supporting evidence

• Other • Other • No attempt


For ratio problems:
• Applies the correct ratio referent • Other

Underlying Concerns/Errors
Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions: Underlying issues or concerns in student solutions:
• Error in equation
• Error in the application of cross products
• Uses incorrect ratio referent
• Uses additive strategies rather than multiplicative strategy (e.g., uses
repeated addition instead of multiplication) • Other

• Units inconsistent or absent Computational errors in student solutions:


• Misinterprets the meaning of the quantities • Computational error
• Remainders are not treated correctly
• Rounding errors

Instructional Notes:

The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-
0227057) November 21, 2008
Session 9.3 Telling the Story – Implications for Instruction

1) What are some proportional strategies evidenced student work across your class?

2) What are some underlying issues or concerns evidenced in student work across
your class?

3) What are some implications for instruction?

1 The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education (Award Number
S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057) v 1.0 June 13, 2007