Running Head: STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE

INTASC Standard 3 and Standard 4 Rationale and Reflection

John Moyer

Regent University
STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE 2

Rationale

During my placement at Independence Middle School, a task that was always important

to me was to ensure that the learning environment was supportive, and that it gave the students

the maximum number of tools to understand the concepts. This includes properly forming groups

for group activities, selecting students appropriately for small groups, as well as student

placement and arrangement in the classroom. Paying attention to all of these helped not only

with academic but also behavioral issues that were occurring in the classroom. A significant

portion of me doing this included keeping sticky notes that denoted students who were struggling

in certain areas as well as keeping track of behavioral issues. Unfortunately, there is not much I

can show without breaching privacy; however, I did include a censored picture of the types of

notes I took on the students. Taking these notes down on students who are struggling in certain

areas allowed me to properly form small groups as well as come prepared with additional

materials and methods for the students to tackle mixed number addition in a way they could

better understand.

When placed at Grassfield High School, I was given a new textbook as a resource to look

through. This Algebra II textbook had not been used yet for instruction. I was invited to look

through and see what resources may be useful to use, as the previous textbook for the class was

not rigorous enough. Going through, something that stuck out to me was polynomial division, as

it is a concept that does not pop up often enough on the math track. The book included two ways

to do such division: long division or synthetic division. Synthetic division is noticeably shorter

but is limited to dividing by binomials of the form “x – k,” x, naturally, being the variable and k

being a constant (Larson & Boswell, 2019, p. 171). I constructed a graphic organizer that would

help the students take notes on the information as well as to keep track of the two methods their
STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE 3

strengths, weaknesses, and limitations. This also includes several key tips in order to keep the

students from making careless errors.

Reflection

Reflecting upon my information keeping on students, I do believe that a better method

would be making use of Excel or Google Spreadsheets to keep track of the information.

Lehmann (2002) recommends Excel for keeping track of information for a committee, which

easily translates to classroom use. By using Excel, not only would I have less resources (and

papers) to keep track of, but I would also be able to organize the data by unit and even sections

of units. Keeping track of all of the data in one centralized spot can not only benefit me in all of

the aforementioned activities in the rationale (small groups, cooperative learning, etc.), but also

can benefit in the creation of learning plans for substitutes and collaborative efforts. Having a

quick place to reference when questioned on a students’ success also may aid in parent-teacher

conferences as well. All of these things will add up to a better learning environment.

Reflecting upon the graphic organizer, I believe that it would be helpful to a student as

opposed to simply giving the student the two pages of the textbook to read. First, it destigmatizes

the information from being boring and read from. Secondly, it condenses the most important

parts into one page, allowing the students to have easy reference to the information.

Additionally, “Graphic organizers help students transfer knowledge from working memory into

long‐term memory,” according to Record (2015). By creating resources for the students to use

themselves, this creates self-led learning in the future, where the students can have those “aha!”

moments based on either remembering the information from the graphic organizer or being able

to find the graphic organizer when needing to access the information.

STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE 4
STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE 5

Dividing Polynomials by Polynomials

Long Division
How? You would perform long division
the same way you would with
integers. Set the _________outside
of the division symbol. Place the
__________ inside the division
symbol. Finally, make sure that you
include a 0xe for any missing x’s
with an exponent, e, less than your
________.
Synthetic Division
You must be dividing by a ___________
of the form x – k. Write the
_________________ of the
___________ in order of
_____________ exponents. You will
still include a 0 for any missing x-term.
Bring down the leading coefficient.
Then, multiply it by k. Finally, add it to
the coefficient above. You repeat this
process until completion. The last
number is your remainder.

x−3 ¿−x3 + 4 ´x 2+ 0 x+ 9 k-value→3 -1 4 0 9

x 3−3 x 2
x 2+ 0 x+ 9 -3 3 9
-1 1 3 18
−x 2+ 3 x
remainder
3 x+ 9
−3 x+ 9
The curved arrows represent where you
remainder → 18
REMEMBE multiply by k (3). You then add the
R number above which gives you the
To set your number below the bottom line. Those
remainder numbers become your result, placing the
over your −x3 + 4 x 2+ 9 numbers as coefficients starting with x
divisor for x−3 having an exponent of one less than the
both methods! dividend:
is equal to
18
2 18 −x 2+ x+3+
−x + x+3+ x−3
x−3
You get the same result!
When? The long division method allows When your divisor is in the form x – k.
you to divide any two polynomials.
Use this method when you cannot
use the Synthetic Division method.
Note: This is a condensed version of the graphic organizer, as this paper’s margins are wider
than the margins I normally use (0.5” all around).
STANDARDS 3 AND 4 RATIONALE 6

References

Larson, R., & Boswell, L. (2019). Big Ideas Math Algebra 2 Virginia Edition. Erie, PA: Big

Ideas Learning.

Lehmann, K. (2002). Excel as You’ve Never Seen it. Multimedia Schools, 9(1), 42.

Record, M. (2015). Implications of Graphic Organizers in an Age of Social Media. Special

Issue: Constructivism Reconsidered in the Age of Social Media, 2015(144), 73–86. doi:

https://doi-org.ezproxy.regent.edu/10.1002/tl.20164