The class that I observed was a high school Geometry math class.

There were 38 students

in the class total with ages ranging from 13 to 17 and grade levels ranging from ninth to twelfth

grade. The majority of the class are freshmen and sophomores although there are juniors and

seniors also mixed in. Her classroom population proportion is similar to the school’s population

proportion in that the majority of her students are of Hispanic descent with a minority that

consists of Caucasian, African-American, and Asian-American students. The school does have a

large English Learner Population and I did overhear some students talking primarily in Spanish

the first time I observed her class. From my initial observation, it also seems like the class has a

high energy level and loves to communicate amongst themselves.

The student that I observed was a freshman. He is a Redesignated English Learner and

had been redesignated prior to High School. He did not have an IEP, 504, other learning plan, or

other learning accommodation. The class was a college prep level non-honors course. Being a

freshman in this class, he would be considered above average for those in the class. Since the

majority of students in this class are around his grade and age, he fits the environment well,

according to the article by Robert Roeser (2007). I previously taught Geometry and my student

population (at the same school) was roughly 1% freshmen, 40% sophomores, 50% juniors, and

9% seniors. Although most of the students liked to communicate amongst themselves, my focus

student was not one of them. He kept to himself and communicated with others when prompted

to. He sat on the side of the class. He did not have any physical disabilities or challenges and the

only physical challenges that could be seen in this class among the rest of the class were the need

for preferential seating or corrective eyewear.

The framework of the instructional sequence was already set by the district although the

teacher had made adjustments to review and reteach general congruency for her classes.
Challenges that existed for this sequence were a lack of understanding congruency as well as a

lack of experience working with shapes and transforming shapes. The students previously

worked with rigid transformations and had difficulty identifying transformations that led to

images of objects.

The substantive mathematical idea of the unit is geometric congruence for two-

dimensional figures. The goals for the unit are to use congruence and its properties to identify

congruent shapes, prove shapes are congruent, and use congruent shapes to solve different

problems. The substantive mathematical idea for the instructional sequence was congruent

triangles. The goals of the unit included identifying congruent parts of congruent triangles,

marking congruent parts, and writing congruency statements. Through the instructional

sequence, students will work with figures and objects that have the same number of parts, parts

that have the same length, and parts that have the same degree measure. Through their work with

identifying all parts are congruent in pairs of triangles, they will work towards theorems that

reduce the amount of congruent parts they need to prove that a pair of triangles are congruent.

After the extensive practice students have working with triangles and proving they are congruent,

they will move onto quadrilaterals and other polygons to prove theorems about their sides and

angles.

In the previous unit of study, students learned about rigid transformations of objects.

They learned how they could translate, reflect, or rotate different polygons and figures without

altering the scale of the object or changing any other measure. That unit was the foundation for

congruence because what they will be using is their recognition to identify if parts seem to be

congruent. They initially used patty paper to perform rigid transformations and to informally
check if figures were congruent through lining them up. After this unit of experience, they can

better recognize and conjecture that figures may be congruent.

In this unit, students again initially used patty paper to help with their understanding. The

reason being they have experience with it and are aware of its benefits (see-through, able to trace

on, and easy to use to demonstrate a translation, reflection, or rotation). The students would trace

figures and match them up with other shapes to determine if they were congruent or not.

In the sequence I made adjustments to (Diagrams and congruency marks added onto the

worksheet provided), students were to first write congruency statements given a pair of

congruent triangles. To help facilitate the student’s progress, all students reviewed the definition

of congruence, what congruency marks looked like for sides of polygons and angles, and how to

use congruency marks. After this review, students were given congruent triangles with various

congruency marks and asked to identify the congruent parts. From there, students were shown

congruency statements (which have the congruent parts in corresponding positions) and given

time to discover the correspondence.

After practicing writing three congruency statements for three pairs of congruent

triangles, students were given time to practice identifying congruent parts and write congruency

statements with their preset groups. They were given ten minutes to list congruent parts for four

pairs of congruent angles and write congruency statements for the four pairs. Giving the students

time in class may not seem like an adaptation but in the case of the focus student, this certainly

was. Many students in her class are involved in extracurricular activities outside of the classroom

and this practice time ensures that all students at least worked four problems to increase their

understanding. Working with their groups also helps solidify their understanding of congruency
statements because this gives them another explanation of how they can make or use them from

someone other than the teacher.

Lastly, students would be going one step further towards mastery of congruency

statements through using them inversely. The students began by writing congruency statements

given congruency marks and identify congruent parts using congruency statements. Now they

would be using congruency statements to make congruency marks and finally using congruency

statements to make their own sketches and add congruency marks. The reason why this latter

part of the activity is so important to the student’s development is the idea of knowing something

“inside and out” or in this case “forwards and backwards”. By being able to take a congruency

statement and draw their own sketches, the students demonstrate a thorough understanding of the

relationship between statements and diagrams.

Challenges that are inherit in teaching this mathematical idea include the idea of

congruence itself. When I used to teach this course myself, I would find it astonishing that some

students would still have a hard time understanding congruence at the end of the year. Time and

time again students need to be reminded the definition and what it looks like from figure to

figure. Specific challenges from this class included having the students practice congruency

enough. Giving the students time in class to practice a few problems was only one part of

meeting these challenges. The other part was motivating the students to do them in the time

given. By having most of the diagrams and details for the practice problems on the worksheet,

this helped eliminate any time wasted “copying down the problem”. I also believe that the

instruction had a low floor so most of the students including the focus student had a fairly easy

time getting started.

 The focus student was chosen because he is of a different descent than I (he is Hispanic).

He is also a redesignated English Learner. For most teachers, he would be linguistically and

ethnically different than they are however his teacher is also of Hispanic descent and speaks

fluent Spanish. Since these similarities exist, it is easy for him to speak to her in his native

tongue whenever he finds he is unable to find the words in English.

His responses were comprehensive and demonstrates that he has a strong understanding

of congruency although there were a few errors in his work. For the first portion (working with

figures, identifying congruent parts, and writing a congruency statement), he correctly writes

congruency statements for all seven pairs of triangles (#1-7). He also correctly identifies all the

congruent parts and writes these statements correctly. For #8-11, the first part of working

inversely, he also does this correctly although not completely. He correctly marks all the

congruent sides but forgets to mark all the congruent angles. For #12-14, sketching his own

diagrams and identifying the congruent parts, he draws satisfactory pairs of triangles but seems

to initially forget how to correctly write congruency statements for congruent parts. He doesn’t

use the right notation for sides. He does it correctly for the first two sides of the last problem,

#14, but then again makes the same mistake for the last pair of congruent sides. He has no issues

with identifying congruent angles here.

When talking with the student after he submitted his work, I bring these mistakes to his

attention by asking him to explain some of his work. He didn’t initially realize his mistake but

when I asked him how many letters he must use to note a side, he realizes his errors. Here I try to

ask productive questions because of the increased interaction according to Tienken, Goldberg,

and DiRocco (2009). This error was actually very typical of my own students when I taught the

course. When I asked him about why he didn’t mark the angles, he said he simply forgot to do it
because he was in a hurry to finish it. Overall this reflective discussion I believe also increased

his awareness and helped him feel seen in this class (Rodgers 2006).

After reviewing the student’s work and considering how the course went when I had

taught it, I came up with a few suggestions for his teacher. As the sequence moves forward, it is

important to review the definition of congruence and emphasize the correct notation when noting

congruency. Doing this in the warm ups consistently in the unit would be wise because

references to that same day could be made and students would be exposed to and practice these

skills. The reason for this is because of the errors that the student made in his practice. He used

incorrect notation for noting sides of his triangles were congruent. By having all students

practice this daily, they should have the skill mastered and it should become second nature.

If I were to make any changes to the instruction, I would add more structure to the

practice. More specifically, I would add structure like “Side GO ≅ Side ___” so that students

see what type of notation is being used and what parts need to be identified. The reason

being the focus student used incorrect notation in his work. I would reuse the rest of the

instruction/worksheet because students class-wide did find it useful to have the diagrams

given first. It was also very handy for the students to have their own worksheets and

diagrams to draw on as opposed to having them copy them down from the board. I would

also keep the same instructor. Since she was also of Hispanic descent and spoke Spanish

with him as needed, I believe the teaching for the focus student was culturally responsible

based on the article by Geneva Gay (2001). The order in which the students learned to use

congruency statements is also something that I would keep. I believe that the order in

which they did the practice and the order to which they practiced using congruency
statements is the best because it tied to their prior work and built off their knowledge of

congruent parts.