ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 1

Action Research Project: Using Data to Strengthen Mathematics Curriculum

By: Stephanie McLean
University of New England
April 20, 2014







ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 2
Table of Contents
Introduction....4
Problem Statement...4
Research Questions.............4
Hypothesis..5
Literature Review..5
Introduction.5
Summary of Literature Review..7
Methodology.8
Research Design.8
Data Collection Plan..8
Data Analysis.9
Sample Selection9
Summary of Methodology .....................................................................................9
Action Plan9
Timeline...10
Reference..12
Appendices...14
Appendix A.14
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 3
Appendix B.15
Appendix C.16
Appendix D.17
















ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 4

Introduction
Action Research Project: Using Data to Strengthen Mathematics Curriculum
This action research study will take place at the Glenburn School, which is a pre
kindergarten through 8
th
grade school. With Glenburn being a suburb of Bangor, Maine,
there is a wide diversity of students who attend the one school. As great schools do,
Glenburn is continually looking for areas of improvement. Each year they target areas of
the curriculum that need work. Mathematics was targeted as a school wide goal this year.
Using professional development time, teachers and administrators will compare data
from standardized tests with math standards and instructional practices in the classroom
to identify any discrepancies.
Problem Statement
Students at the Glenburn School are not showing significant gains in the area of
mathematics, specifically in grades 4-8. Scores on standardized tests show that students
are staying the same or declining in specific math areas. Administrators and teachers
together will evaluate the math curriculum to see where instruction can be strengthened
in grades K-8 in order to improve performance on standardized tests.
Research Questions
Declining math scores on standardized tests suggest the current math curriculum
is not sufficient and needs to be strengthened in specific areas. By strengthening the math
curriculum in those specific areas scores will improve.
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 5

Hypothesis
Targeting and enhancing instructional practices in areas where students are low
performing on standardized tests will improve future standardized test scores in the area
of mathematics.
Literature Review
Introduction
As descending scores on standardized assessments set off a fury of debates,
districts need to stop pointing fingers and instead create an action plan to better prepare
students for those assessments. Students are not doing any worse, they are just being
held to a higher standard. Proficiency rates are not falling; its the standards that are
becoming more rigorous (Fleisher, 2013).
Aligning and implementing new curricula is the only way to raise those
plummeting test scores. Strong leadership is needed to facilitate, coordinate, and guide
all teachers on how to effectively implement the Common Core into their daily classroom
activities. As stated in the article, Make Room For The Common Core, standards are
meaningless until they are defined. Once defined, they become a roadmap to rigor for
schools to follow (Chaffee & Gullen, 2013).
With careful comparison between current instructional and assessment practices
and the rigorous common core state standards, administrators and teachers together need
to connect new expectations to every classroom, and create scaffolds to prepare students
for success (Chaffee & Gullen, 2013).
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 6
A collaborative approach utilizing administrators and teachers specialty areas will
ensure all discipline areas are included with the implementation of the Common Core
Standards in every classroom. Working as a team will shed light on areas that a single
individual may have not thought of. A variety of teaching styles will bring to the table
different strategies that can be used during instruction time (Wilhelm, 2011). Schools
need to provide teachers with collaborative planning time where they can look at the data
and make informed decisions about planning, practice, and activities beyond what they
are currently doing with data creating more opportunities for students (DRIVING
DECISIONS WITH DATA, 2012).
Effective use of data is the key to improving student achievement outcomes.
Instructional strategies should be based on formative assessments given at the beginning
of each new unit. Pre assessing the students ahead of time will give teachers the data
needed to target areas of concern and gaps in the curriculum (Wilhelm, 2011). Teachers
can then use the data as a reference to give students direct feedback on their strengths and
weakness. Putting students in the driver seat will increase motivation and encourage goal
setting. Data interpretation should be an ongoing, school wide, process (Bongiorno,
2011). Research shows that if instructional plans are based on assessment data, it's
more likely that students will attain the desired learning outcomes (DRIVING
DECISIONS WITH DATA, 2012).
Once the learning goal is set teachers are assigned the task of effectively
implementing strategies in the classroom to ensure that all students meet the learning
goals that have been set. Best practices in mathematics have evolved and continue to do
so. Students are expected to do a lot more then just memorize facts. They are now
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 7
expected to apply mathematical procedures and concepts to real life types of situations.
Students need to be able to make connections, create representations, communicate ideas,
use reasoning and apply problem-solving strategies to mathematical concepts (Daniels,
Hyde, & Zemelman, 2005).
One method of math instruction that is gaining in popularity is using technology
such as the website, Khan Academy, to give students the opportunity to learn about,
practice, and track their progress virtually. The data that the website churns out and the
site's gaming features seem to be the real learning motivators for students of all ages.
Students become "proficient" in a concept by answering a "streak" of 10 computer-
generated questions: miss
one and the computer sends you back to the start. They can also earn "energy points" for
correct answers, and badges for accomplishments as diverse as working speedily (that's a
meteorite badge). The option to add a coach allows teachers to track progress of
individual students as well (Kronholz, 2012).
A teacher must be effective overall to effectively develop students mathematical skills.
They must exhibit good classroom management skills, especially in classrooms using
differentiated instruction; actively engage their students; and make efficient use of
instructional time. Without these essential elements, a mathematics lesson cannot
succeed (Protheroe, 2007).
Summary of Literature Review
As we move towards a standards based high school diploma, the focus in the math
classroom needs to be shifted. Historically, the focus has been on specific problems and
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 8
not on building the foundations necessary for understanding higher-level math. These
foundations can only be built with a mathematics program that teaches concepts and
skills, and problem-solving Essential characteristics of an effective standards-based
mathematics classroom must include; lessons designed to address specific standards-
based concepts or skills, student centered learning activities, inquiry and problem solving
focused lessons, critical thinking and knowledge application skills Adequate time, space,
and materials to complete tasks, varied, continuous assessment, designed to evaluate both
student progress and teacher effectiveness (The Education Alliance, 2006).
Methodology
Research Design
Due to decreasing standardized test scores in the area of mathematics, the current
curriculum at the Glenburn School needs to be evaluated and revamped. In order to
improve the scores a determination of modifications to the current curriculum needs to be
made. If the curriculum is strengthened in the low performing areas, standardized test
scores will improve (See Appendix C Data Triangulation Matrix).
Data Collection Plan
A quantitative research method was chosen for this action research project in
order to fully illustrate the problem. A total score of proficient and proficient with
distinction in the math section of the NECAP test was used to compare scores across
grade levels 3-8. Data was taken from the last 3 years to show the progression of scores
over a period of time (See Appendix A for NECAP Data). Data was also collected from
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 9
each subcategory of the math section to target specific areas in need of improvement (See
Appendix B for a break down of the subcategories).
Data Analysis
Administrators and teachers will evaluate the mathematics curriculum using the
Common Core State Standards to ensure all areas are covered during the course of a
school year. A curriculum map will be made for each grade level to be used as a
roadmap for teachers to follow (See Appendix D for template of curriculum map).
Sample Selection
The students at the center of this action research project were selected because of
their grade level. Students in grades 3-8 take the NECAP test annually. Up until this fall,
average scores received on the New England Common Assessment Program annual test
has determined whether or not school districts in Maine, including the Glenburn School
Department, is making adequately yearly progress. With so much riding on the scores
received on this annual standardized test, it only makes sense for the students who are
expected to take part in this test to be the center of this study.
Summary of Mythology
With the analysis of data and careful planning, the mathematics curriculum at
Glenburn School can be strengthened. A strong curriculum, collaboration among
colleagues, and data driven instruction will ensure students are well prepared for future
standardized tests.
Action Plan
This action research project represents a work in progress. Currently, as a team
we are in the initial stages of the curriculum mapping process. Teachers, specialists,
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 10
support staff and administrators are working together to create curriculum maps for each
grade level in the mathematics area. Once curriculum maps are completed and reviewed
they will be available for all staff members and community members to view. Completed
curriculum maps will be used by the teachers as a roadmap for instruction within the
classroom. This will ensure consistency across grades and also a continuum as students
move up through the grade levels. Once the math curriculum maps are created and
implemented, other curriculum areas will be targeted.
Timeline
In Table 1 I have described in detail a timeline of planned actions to finish out this
project. The table details recommended actions, who is involved when and where the
action will take place and the resources required to complete the action plan.
Table 1
Action Research Timeline
Recommended
Action
Who When/Where Required
Resources
Complete First draft
of curriculum maps
for mathematics

- Classroom
teachers, specialist
teachers, and
support staff
-Administrators will
be available to
answer questions
and/or guide
March &
April/Inservice
- Curriculum Map
Template
- Everyday Math
Teachers Book
- Access to Online
EDM
- Common Core
Math Standards
Review completed
drafts of curriculum
maps and make any
needed revisions

Review Team
(Administrators and
selected teachers)
May/Scheduled
Meeting
- Completed
Curriculum Maps

Post links to grade
level curriculum
maps on Glenburn
School website

Technology
Coordinator
June/Scheduled
Meeting
- Completed
Curriculum Maps
- Computer, Internet
access

ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 11
Present and Share
With Staff Members
Review Team June Staff Meeting Projector, Laptop,
Internet Access

Curriculum
Mapping for other
content areas
All Staff Members Professional
Development Days
- Curriculum
materials
- Curriculum Map
Template





















ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 12
Reference
Bongiorno D. (2011). Using student achievement data to support
instructional decision making. National Association of Elementary School
Principals, NAESP's Best Practices for Better Schools,
http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Achievement_blue.pdf

Chaffee, M., & Gullen, K. (2013). Make room for the common core in
every classroom. Principal Leadership, 14(2), 24-28. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1477395637?accountid=12756

(2012). Driving decisions with data. Tech & Learning, 32(9), 40-42.
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1011091988?accountid=12756
Fleisher, L. (2013). National test-score declines are likely;
drops in new york math and reading results
are tied to a new national curriculum standard. Wall Street Journal (Online).
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1418020152?accountid=12756

Daniels, H., Hyde, A., & Zemelman, S. (2005). Best practice todays standards
for teaching and learning in americas schools third edition. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann. Retrieved from
http://www.heinemann.com/shared/onlineresources/e00744/sample.pdf
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 13

Kronholz, J. (2012). Math instruction goes viral: can khan move the
bell curve to the right? The Education Digest, 78(2), 23-30. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1081805155?accountid=12756
Protheroe, N. (2007). What does good math instruction look
like. Principal, 51-54. Retrieved from
http://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Principal/2007/S-Op51.pdf

The Education Alliance. (Spring, 2006). Closing the achievement gap best
practices in teaching mathematics. The Education Alliance, Retrieved from
http://www.educationalliance.org/files/Teaching-Mathematics.pdf

Wilhelm, T. (2011). A team approach to using student data.
Leadership, 40(5), 26-28,30,38. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/869600951?accountid=12756







ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 14
Appendices
Appendix A
NECAP REPORTING
TEACHING YEAR

2013-2014
GRADE 3
R 91 %
M 83%
GRADE 4
R 81%
M 81%
GRADE 5
R 79%
M 62%
GRADE 6
R 74%
M 66%
GRADE 7
R 87%
M 54%
GRADE 8
R 72%
M 56 %




2012-2013
GRADE 3
R - 83%
M 75%
GRADE 4
R 73%
M 74%
GRADE 5
R 74 %
M 67%
GRADE 6
R 81%
M 71 %
GRADE 7
R 82 %
M 62%
GRADE 8
R 92%
M 81%




2011-2012
GRADE 3
R 83%
M 71%
GRADE 4
R 81%
M 75%
GRADE 5
R 80%
M 63%
GRADE 6
R 71%
M 57 %
GRADE 7
R 82%
M 68%
GRADE 8
R 92%
M 82%


ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 15
Appendix B
NECAP MATH SUBCATAGORIES







0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
NECAP MATH RESULTS Fall
2013
Total Possible Points
Data, Statistics, & Probability
Functions & Algebra
Geometry & Measurement
Numbers & Operations
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 16
Appendix C
Data Triangulation Matrix
Data Source
Research Questions 1 2 3
1. If we strengthen
the math curriculum
in specific areas will
student scores
improve on
standardized tests?




Grade Level NECAP
Averages
Subcategory
Breakdown of scores
by grade level
Curriculum Map to
identify and fill gaps







ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 17
Appendix D
Curriculum Map
Timeline
Grade Level:
August/September October November
Quarter
End of the
Unit
Assessment




Content
Standard(s)







Resources








ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 18

Timeline December January February
Quarter
End of the
Unit
Assessment

Content
Standard(s)

Resources



ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 19
Timeline March April May/June
Quarter
End of the
Unit
Assessment

Content
Standard(s)

Resources




ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 20

















ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT 21