You are on page 1of 18


With job-embedded online follow-up support to a face-to-face professional learning program, can teachers implement lessons to increase student understanding of fractions? Questions that were examined include: 1) What is the impact of the Online Classroom Support (OCS) program of teachers on: a) Teacher pedagogical content knowledge? b) Teachers uses of classroom practices conducive to sense-making about fractions? c) Student conceptual understanding of fractions? 2) Which design features of the OCS program were most valued by teachers as useful professional learning tools?

Algebra should be demanded as a civil right (Cobb & Moses, 2001). Both procedural fluency and conceptual understanding of fractions are critical to success in algebra (The National Mathematics Panel, 2008; and Common Core State Standards, 2010). Teachers need professional learning and support for fractions 2012-2013: Population for study had F2F professional development for fractions but no classroom support 2013 -2014: Population participated in OCS program for this study

Background (continued)
Effective professional development must be of sustained duration and connected to teachers work. (Porter et al, 2000). Professional learning must be ongoing and situated in teachers work. (Lieberman, 1995). Teachers need support in how to function in the context of complex classrooms, not some orderly delivery of best practices (Barab et al., 2001). Barrier: the schedule of the school day does NOT allow for professional dialogue about problems of practice A potential solution: OCS an online community for teachers

In order to measure the value added from the Online Classroom Support program, teachers were selected within categories to form 2 groups; one group had access to the Online Classroom Support (treatment group); and the other group did not have access to the Online Classroom Support (control group).

Methods (continued)
The treatment was the OCS, created as a Google Community including: 3 text documents outlining conceptual ways to develop lessons; 4 Educreations whiteboard recordings supporting those lessons; 6 prompts for reflection about math content, anticipated student thinking and potential teacher moves; capability of posting open discussion by treatment teachers.

Methods (continued)
Sample Educreations Slide from OCS

Methods (measures)
The following measures were gathered for comparison of the treatment and control groups to answer the specified questions: Q1a: Pre and post assessments of Pedagogical Content Knowledge of teachers using items from Learning for Mathematics Teaching (Ball, 2005) Q1b: Pre and post surveys of teacher practice Q1c: 2 sets of matched student pairs of pre and post assessments about fractions Q2: Post survey of treatment teachers reflecting about their participation Q2: Post survey about the usefulness of OCS program features completed by treatment teachers

Methods (scoring)
Open response items on student assessments were scored using a 4-point rubric. Three scorers completed a standardization process, and scored each item twice without knowing if the item was pre or post, nor what the first scorer gave the item. When the 2 scores differed, the third scorer scored the paper to determine the final score.

Methods (scoring)
Sample Student Open Response Item
8. Fusik is trying to understand why 2/3 should be equal to 10/15 . Fusik thinks that they cannot be equal because the numbers 10 and 15 are larger. Please explain so Fusik can understand. Use a picture to help as you explain.

Preliminary Results
Graph 1 shows mathematics content knowledge results for teachers (Q1a) and students(Q1c). In the first comparison the treatment teachers had a slightly greater average of pedagogical content knowledge assessments that the control teachers. The next 2 comparisons show students of treatment teachers had a greater average growth from pre to post than did students of control teachers.

70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Q1a: Avg. % of Tchr Q1b: Avg. % Studnt Ped. Cont. Knowledge Growth Quiz 1 (N = 6, N = 9) (N=189, N = 194) Q1b: Avg % Studnt Growth Quiz 2 (N = 134, N = 159) Control Treatment

Preliminary Results
Graph 2 shows teachers self reported frequencies of their use of practices conducive to sense making and conceptual understanding. These data do not show an impact on the treatment groups use of those practices (Q1b).

8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 Prac ces CONDUCIVE to sense Using mental math tasks, or Asking students to explain why, making and conceptual tasks that require more than 1 build on reasoning, produce development of frac ons day explana ons on quizzes, tests. Prac ces to check understanding

Preliminary Results
Graph 3 shows that of the 41 user posts, the OCS was used to discuss teaching issues only 39% of the time (Q2).
Categories of Teachers' Use of Online Classroom Support (Google Community)

Asked questions about practice, 5, 14%

Introductions, 9, 25% Responses to 6 planned prompts, 9, 25%

Logistical Details, 8, 22%

Showed comradery, 5, 14%

Preliminary Conclusions
Preliminary comparisons of the control and treatment groups using descriptive statistics indicate that treatment teachers outperformed control teachers on the pedagogical content knowledge assessments, however 2 control teachers did not complete the assessments (Q1a).

Preliminary Conclusions
Preliminary comparisons of control and treatment teachers uses of practices conducive to sense-making and conceptual development, both when teaching fractions and in general, shows control teachers reported a slightly greater frequency of use. These data were too close to be able to argue a meaningful difference (Q1b).

Preliminary Conclusions
Preliminary comparisons of the control and treatment groups using descriptive statistical analysis indicates that students of treatment teachers outperformed students of control teachers (Q1c).

Preliminary Conclusions
For further inspection: Compare pairs of equivalent control and treatment teachers, or teams of control and treatment teachers, e.g. compare 8th grade control versus 8th grade treatment. Determine amount of use of OCS by teacher Determine possible correlations of PCK and student growth, grade level and student growth, use of OCS and student growth

Literature cited
Barab, S., MaKinster, J., Moore, J., Cunningham, D. (2001). Designing and building an on-line community: The struggle to support sociability in the inquiry learning forum. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 71-96. Cobb, C. E., & Moses, R. (2002). Radical equations: Civil rights from Mississippi to the Algebra Project. Beacon Press. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for mathematics. Retrieved from Hill, H.C., Schilling, S.G., & Ball, D.L. (2004) Developing measures of teachers mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105, 11-30. Lieberman, A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development: Transforming Conceptions of Professional Learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 591-596. National Mathematics Advisory Panel, (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education website: Porter, A., Garet, M., Desimone, L., Yoon, K., Birman, B. (2000). Does professional development change teaching practice? Results from a three-year study.