I am a firm believer in “data-driven instruction” even though as a mathematician I am not a huge fan of the name (oftentimes the “data” is not REALLY data, but rather an aggregate of a lot of different pieces of information, many of which, if not most, are almost impossible to quantify). Every action I make, and every lesson I plan or assessment I create is based on data. However, I am still working on being more explicitly “data-driven”, instead of running on the notices and feelings I am receiving from my class. Most of the time I am pretty much spot on with how my students are receiving and understanding the content, but occasionally they manage to sneak past my less rigorous assessments and make it to a formative assessment woefully unprepared. Students can be their own worst enemies. I am lucky in that many of my kiddos are very invested in their education and will communicate to me when they do not understand a concept, or a method of delivery does not work for them. However, not all of my students have this ability, and in fact it is the ones who need the MOST help that are the least responsive to their own education.
Moving forward I plan on having more formative assessments, as well as more exit tickets and “zip-ups” for lessons. The “zip-ups”, as I would like to introduce them, will force students to “close their backpack” on the learning they do in class on a given day which should improve retention as they run off to their next class. More importantly for my instruction, though, is the fact that I will have more frequent touches with my students’ comprehension which should inform my needs for reteaching, moving on, and addressing confusions both minor and major. I feel comfortable with the data tools I have, I would just like to use them more, and get more tools that provide genuine data, and are not simply my noticings...
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Julian SpringerMath Department - Animas High School Archives
December 2019
Categories |