WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 1

Standard

Candidates know, understand, and use the major concepts and procedures that define number

and operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, and data analysis and probability. In doing

so they consistently engage problem solving, reasoning and proof, communication, connections,

and representation.

Math Framing Statement

Traditional methods of mathematics instruction have emphasized memorization and

using algorithms. This has resulted from teaching that is based on “… a coverage orientation-

marching through a textbook irrespective of priorities, desired results, learner needs and

interests, or apt assessment evidence …” (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 3). Effective

mathematics instruction is now guided by standards that ensure the curriculum addresses both

process (methods for developing understanding) and product (what students should learn) (Van

de Walle et al., 2016). An elementary mathematics teacher should use these standards to help

students develop a deep understanding of the knowledge and skills in the mathematics

curriculum, which they can apply to real life contexts. During my math methods course I did a

case study that demonstrated my ability to recognize and analyze classroom instructional

practices related to components of the process standards: communication, representations of

concepts using models, and using a variety of strategies to solve problems (National Council of

Teachers of Mathematics, 2020).

The significance of communication in mathematics instruction can be viewed through

theoretical frameworks and best practices that apply to all areas of learning. Vygotsky’s (1978)

theory of development describes the importance of conversation in learning because oral

communication between teacher and student, and students within the same Zone of Proximal
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 2

Development “… help learners by explaining, modeling, or breaking down complex skills,

knowledge, or concepts” (cited in Slavin, 2018, p. 34). Teaching methods such as cooperative

learning that allow students to discuss their strategies have also been identified as an effective

approach for differentiating instruction for students at different learning levels (Tomlinson,

2014). Prior experiences mean students have different entry and exit points, and conversations

that encourage personal connections results in students that “… are encouraged to engage with

the task in a way that makes sense to them, rather than trying to recall or replicate a procedure

shown to them” (Van de Walle et al., 2016, p. 38). The observations I made of student C in my

case study demonstrates how I recognized the importance of allowing students to explain the

strategies they use and how peer groups are important as they discuss mathematical thinking. My

analysis also highlighted the need to focus on process, rather than everyone having the same

answer. When teaching mathematics, I understand that “classrooms need to provide structures

and supports to help students make sense of mathematics in light of what they know” and “it is

through student thinking, talking, and writing, that we can help them reflect on how

mathematical ideas are connected to each other” (Van de Walle et al., 2016, p. 27).

Another aspect of mathematics instruction I identified in my case study analysis of

student B was the importance of hands-on methods students could use to create representations

of their understanding of mathematical concepts using models. This practice is informed by

Piaget’s (1954) theory of cognitive development that describes how children progress in their

ability to understand abstract concepts; many elementary aged students “… can perform

operations that involve objects, and they can reason logically as long as reasoning can be applied

to specific or concrete examples” (cited in Santrock, 2014, p. 22). Best practices in mathematics

instruction includes providing students a wide range of tools (pictures, objects, etc.) and
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 3

manipulatives (base ten blocks, algebra tiles, etc.), instruction in effective ways to use them, and

then giving students a choice in deciding which tools will help them to “… notice important

mathematical relationships that can be discussed, connecting the concrete representations to

abstract concepts” (Van de Walle et al., 2016, p. 22). In my observation of student B, the use of

the multiplication table and creating a picture was a demonstration of the flexible use of tools to

aid her understanding. Researchers have noted that “the greatest mathematical benefit to using

concrete representations is achieved when students independently consider what kinds of

manipulatives they will use and how they can use them to make mathematical meaning or solve

problems” (Sammons, 2018, p. 182).

All of the observations in my case study showed the importance of providing students

opportunities to experiment with different strategies. When lessons are structured to allow

students time to experiment with how to reach an answer, rather than memorization or an

emphasis on algorithms, students feel encouraged to try multiple strategies. Student A in my

case study found an alternative strategy for using the manipulatives to make sense of the concept

of partial products being explored in the lesson. Watching him and asking him to explain his

thinking, rather than reteaching him how to use the materials the way they were presented in the

lesson, allowed me to see the different approach he used to demonstrate his understanding of the

equations. His explanations then assisted other students with exploring the concept using a

different strategy. When students listen to each other explain their strategies it deepens their own

understanding because “… in considering multiple ways, you are making mathematical

connections” (Van de Walle et al., 2016, p. 16). Rather than jumping in, teachers should allow

students opportunities for “… engaging in productive struggle …” since it “… is critical to

developing conceptual understanding (Van de Walle et al., 2016, p. 27). When teachers
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 4

encourage multiple strategies, they create a classroom culture where student thinking about how

to solve a problem is emphasized over finding one correct answer. I agree with the belief that

“to help students engage in real learning, I must ask good questions, allow students to struggle,

and place the responsibility for learning directly on their shoulders” (Reinhart, 2000, p. 5).

Students gain confidence in their mathematical abilities when they feel a sense of

accomplishment and make personal connections to the strategies they use (Van de Walle et al.,

2016).

Some of the critical components of effective mathematics instruction include creating

opportunities for students to communicate their understanding, allowing students flexibility in

their use of tools and manipulatives, and supporting the use of alternative strategies. Math

classrooms should be filled with student talk and a supportive atmosphere that balances process

and content while meeting the standards.

WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 5

References

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2020). Process. Retrieved from

https://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Principles-and-Standards/Process/

Sammons, L. (2018). Teaching students to communicate mathematically. ASCD. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1838355&site=eds-

live&scope=site 

Reinhart, S. C. (2000). Never say anything a kid can say!  Mathematics Teaching in the Middle

School, 5(8), 478-483. Retrieved from https://egan.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/login?

url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/docview/231160094?

accountid=44766

Santrock, J. W. (2014). Child development (14th Edition). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. NY, NY: Pearson.

Tomlinson, C. (2014) Differentiated classrooms: Responding to the needs of all learners 2nd ed.

ASCD.

Van de Walle, J.A., Karp, K.S., and Bay-Williams, J.M. (2016). Elementary and middle school

mathematics: Teaching developmentally (Subscription), 9th Ed. New York: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. 2nd Ed. (2005). Understanding by design. Pearson Merrrill Prentice

Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.