DESIGN PROJECT 1

Table of Contents

Background………………………………………………………………………………..3

Identification and Justification……………………………………………………………4-6

Target Group………………………………………………………………………………6

Theoretical Foundations…………………………………………………………………..7-8

Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………8-10

Proposed Design…………………………………………………………………………..10-16

Explanation of design……………………………………………………………………...18-20

Evaluation of design……………………………………………………………………….20

Data Collection Method……………………………………………………………..20-21

Data Analysis………………………………………………………………………...21-23

Modification of design…………………………………………………………………….23-24

Discussion…………………………………………………………………........................24

Reference………………………………………………………………………………….25-27

Appendices………………………………………………………………………………..28-29
DESIGN PROJECT 2

Background/Introduction

Worldwide there has been a push to improve educational achievement in developed and

developing nations. Within the Caribbean context this is also reflected in our continued progress

towards developed nation status. As such Ministries of Education have expressed concerns as it

relates to students mathematical knowledge and skills, as yearly reports from Caribbean

Examinations Council (CXC) (the regional examination body) suggests that performance in

mathematics is poor at both secondary certification and primary school level (Leacock, 2015).

The education system of Trinidad and Tobago comprises of private and public

preschoolers, primary and secondary schools. Mathematics proficiency attainment starts at the

primary school level which forms the main foundation for future success or failure at both

secondary and tertiary academic levels. Our citizens having a strong grasp of mathematical skills

allows for our society to achieve great advancements in medicine, technology, commerce,

finance and navigation (National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008). All those aspects

mentioned above are crucial for a developing nation to reach its developed status.

Most schools took a traditional approach to teaching and learning in general and or

mainstream education. Teachers utilize the traditional teaching methods with little to no variety

in instructional delivery styles geared towards multiple intelligences and learners diversity.

Students’ academic performance can be related to both in- school and out-of –school factors as a
DESIGN PROJECT 3

matter of fact Rothstein, (2010) outlined that teacher instruction, extra tuition and students

socioeconomic status impacting upon academic success.

After reviewing Ortoire Government Primary School (OGPS) student grading results

from Secondary Entrance Assessment (SEA) over a three year period, together with formative

and summative assessments it was evident that there have been a steady decline in math scores

particularly in fractions. Interviews were also conducted with three (3) of standard five teachers,

who have also observed the steady decline in fraction scores.

In light of the above this paper seeks to address the issue of student’s in standard three (3)

poor academic achievement in mathematics with fractions being the focal aspect by designing a

training workshop in fractions for teachers. This will be done with the view of improving

teachers teaching methodologies, strategies and tools used in classroom instructions. Theories

that will inform this paper entails cognitive apprehensive and situated learning.

Identification and Justification

The education system in the Trinidad and Tobago have been through a lot of adjustments

with the aim of improving it. The SEA results are the defining aspect for primary students’

academic achievement and enrollment into a “good” secondary school based on their scores.

Mathematics has been for decades been a subject that have been on of Ministry of Education

radar. Students excelling and or meeting the required standards in Primary school education

continues to be the main objective of MOE and by extension OGPS.

Albeit, according to the National Test (2011) report which looked at statistics from the

years 2005-2010 stated that between 40-60% of students did not acquire the necessary scores to

meet the required standards in mathematics. Students fell well below the requisite bench mark
DESIGN PROJECT 4

standard of 50% or came close to achieving it. More so, given eight (8 years) there after

Mathematics SEA results for the year 2018 showed only 58.8 % of students scoring over 50 %

(De Silva, 2019). One such affected school is that of OGPS. Based on teachers and

administration observations from classroom formative and summative assessment (inclusive

SEA school summary sheet) students scored below the pass mark in the number strand with

fractions being the most prominent. Fractions have been identified as the content area within the

curriculum that students are having trouble properly grasping thus causing them to

underperform.

Moreover, Ministry of Education (MOE) Assessment 2019-2023 Framework for SEA

outlined the number strand, in the mathematics curriculum amounting to the highest distribution

of marks being awarded (43) forty-three with students having to complete a total of 22 items

from this strand as opposed to the other strands (MOE.gov, 2019). Within the number strand

fractions consists of the greatest allotment, thus there is a need to pay particular attention.

The poor academic showing from students can be attributed to teachers not upgrading

their content and pedagogical knowledge thus not being able to adapt instructions to meet the

needs of their students (Leacock, 2016). Standard four teachers were ask about the last training

mathematics workshop that they attended after graduating University, the response was a

resounding “I never did any additional training”. Added to the above, a University degree only

provided pre service teachers with a couple of courses in the subject area without really getting

in-depth.

Reiter & Davis, (2011) viewed the lack of teacher training as a prohibition to teachers

becoming more accessible to their students. Aksu (2016) posit that a “common error that

teachers have when teaching fractions is having students perform computations before having
DESIGN PROJECT 5

proper background knowledge and understanding of fractions.” Thus the fraction math methods

workshop will facilitate teachers with the know-how and strategies needed to adjust instructional

methodologies. With the over arcing goal to improve students’ academic performance.

Providing professional development to teachers in these modern technological times have

to be carefully thought out in order to capture the innovation, creativity and the advance way in

which students learn. Training and professional development is always more aligned to teaching

rather than the teachers themselves. Thus neglecting “the teacher” as the main aspect of the

training conversation and by not changing the narrative, it will continue to have an overall

negative impact on training. Getting educators to change their concept and the way in which they

view mathematical content is the first positive step towards effective instructional delivery.

A study done by Thornton (2014) on culturally relevant literacy instruction: Promoting

shifts in teachers’ beliefs and Practices indicated that “theoretical learning, critical, self-

reflection, collaboration and longevity are integral to support shifts in teachers, beliefs’ and

practices”. Thus basically this training workshop will consider the situated real life scenarios

that occur during the classroom as well as what will be encountered on a daily basis, cultural

context and experiences during the learning process.

Target Group

The primary target group consists of four (4) standard three teachers. Standard three (3)

class was chosen as a means to try to remedy the problem by using early intervention. The target

group teachers are University trained with Bachelor’s degree in Education, knowledgeable

concerning the mathematics syllabus, techniques, concepts and have more than ten (10) years

teaching experience.
DESIGN PROJECT 6

In addition, these teachers are accustomed to working with students from the

aforementioned standards. The training workshop in fractions is intended to benefit teachers by

aiding them to improve their classroom instruction methods, strategies and by extension peek

student’s interest in learning math. The training workshop and training sessions would provide

the necessary framework for teachers to reevaluate the way that they give math instructions.

Thus improving students’ scores in fractions and their overall academic outcome for SEA and

beyond.

Theoretical Foundations

Different scholars have presented research in order to implement effective teaching practices for

decades. Mendes & da Silva (2018), stated that the role of the teacher is to develop an interest in

the core aspects of the subject and help the students to solve the problems.

Situated learning theory will be used as one of the underpinned theoretical aspect which

will guide the design. It can be viewed as learning that is embedded within an activity, context

and culture. Similarly the math workshop in fractions will be based upon the Trinidad culture,

context and curriculum. Lave and Wenger (1990) called this process legitimate peripheral

participation. Situated learning environments will place teachers who will be the

students/participants in real world learning situations that requires them to tap into their previous

knowledge becoming so engross in the activity to problem solve (Origin Learning, 2015). This

will be done with the use of a role playing activities where fraction blocks and visual models will

be presented to allow teachers to demonstrate their present methods of teaching fractions.

DESIGN PROJECT 7

Simulations will be included in the form of tutorial videos demonstrating basic fractions

concepts requiring problem solving skills to move to a higher level. Mathematics concepts and

facts are sometimes hard to retain and recall when students are placed under pressure. However,

when learned effortlessly through games, youtube videos and other social settings the

information recall is better (Origin Learning, 2015). This will be used as a case to invite teachers

to make the teaching of fractions into a classroom community corner, where students will use

snacks as a means of learning the concepts.

Another such theoretical foundation guiding the design is that of cognitive

apprenticeship. This theory states that learners are being encouraged to acquire skills alongside a

teacher or master (Pappas, 2015). Teachers will gain knowledge through the workshop from the

subject matter expert (SME) who will demonstrate a concept/task so that participants will gain

understanding of how it will be done and also get the opportunity to outline a lesson plan based

on what was explained by the SME and execute such in their classroom. The workshop will

allow for scaffold activities after the workshop has been completed, through systematic coaching

and mentoring. Thus allowing for untrained teachers and those who are having challenges in the

content areas to be supported as they seek instruction delivery (Leacock, 2015).

Literature Review

The type of mathematical knowledge that is required in teaching goes beyond that of pre-

service teaching education. During teacher’s training preparation, students complete two (2)

three (3) credit courses in University. These are insufficient for pre-service teachers to garner all

the required knowledge and skills that are needed to effectively teach fraction concepts in the

classroom setting. Petrou & Goulding (2011) views teachers’ mathematical knowledge as central
DESIGN PROJECT 8

for teaching. This knowledge may be satisfactory to fulfill the requirements of the school

curriculum being taught but on the other hand is not enough to ensure students’ progress.

Tucker (2011) stated that learning to teach is a continuous process that evolves throughout a

teacher professional life. Teachers’ foundation for learning together with critical thinking,

experiences and reasoning skills aids with basic mathematical principles. Schifter (1999)

outlined what is essential to an elementary mathematics teachers’ understanding of mathematics

is the connection i.e. mathematics must make sense. Teachers must overcome their insecurities

and personal negative feelings associated with mathematics to a place that is comfortable and

meaningful. Transference of happy positive math images to the classroom improves students’

academic outcomes and math confidence thus placing students in a math positive place. Teacher

knowledge is important and involves recognizing unpacking of the mathematical ideas (Ball &

Bass, 2000).

According to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM, 2000) which stated

that students in primary school should obtain a deep proficiency and understanding of fractions,

thus allowing them to use such knowledge to expertly problem solve. NCTM went on further to

posit that teachers are also struggling and feeling frustrated seeking out ways in which to teach

fractions effectively. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 2001) reported

that fractions are very challenging and difficult for students to master. Therefore, there is a need

for teachers to review what students have learned when they move from a lower standard to a

higher standard. This is important to link students past experiences to the present. These linkages

can be the jump start that students need in order to develop a higher level understanding of

fractions. NCTM, (2000) stated that “Effective Mathematics teaching requires understanding

what students know and need to learn and then challenging and supporting them to learn it well”
DESIGN PROJECT 9

(NCTM, 2000 p. 16). Tirosh, (2000) agrees that building on students’ prior knowledge is an

effective teaching strategy which requires teachers to be well informed about the student’s

conceptions and misconceptions about the content. Thus it’s important for teachers to utilize this

information and use appropriate examples and representations to aid with learning.

In order for teachers to increase their efficiency in teaching fractions there must be iterative

evaluation and restructuring of their lessons on fractions concepts. Doing evaluation and

assessment on lesson plans and instruction delivery from time to time is a very good way to

identify what is working and what changes need to be made. Doward (2002) agreed that by

incorporating new ideas and systematic reflections based upon students observations on given

feedback one can justify what fraction strategies and concepts work and this can be used to

improve lessons.

Teachers can design instructions with Universal Design (UDI) in mind. It speaks to the

starting point for developing the framework necessary for instruction. UD can be defined as “the

design of products and environments to be usable by all people to the greatest extent possible,

without the need for adaptation or specialized design” (Burgstahler, 2009). For example the

creation of classroom instructions which includes using multiple intelligences which can benefit

all learners thus being able to reach more students.

It has long been stated that what happens outside of class is just as important to becoming

literate as what happens in class. Tzur (1999) agreed that by using realistic problems with

students in the classroom it’s useful to demonstrate mathematical concepts and assist students to

construct their informal understanding and knowledge for themselves.

Proposed Solution/Design:
DESIGN PROJECT
10

Professional teachers should be given all the necessary requirements to enhance their teaching

process which will in turn improve students’ academic performance. The training workshop

entitled “Fraction Positive Mindset” (FPM) will consist of three (3) three (3) hour sessions once

a week on a Wednesday 9 am to 12pm. The workshop will be held onsite at the OGPS library to

accommodate all participants at no cost charged. The aim of the workshop is to help teachers to

develop advance and integrative type instruction strategies/ methodologies and fundamental

understanding of what is required of them. This in turn can be used when writing up lesson plans

and instruction delivery. It must be noted that “an Instructional designer approaches the task of

instruction by first identifying the problem, and then determining what knowledge and skills are

needed to solve the instructional problem” (Morrison et. al, 2013).

In order to show further evidence of the effectiveness of this conference in terms of

improving statistics across all grades, the study has considered their impact on participants and

communities. When considering the effectiveness of these results one can consider the following

groups. One of these groups can have its own checklist, thoughts, and steps. These are;

Governing bodies, institutions or workshops, as well as students in need of support. Considering

the services provided from a multi-stakeholder perspective, students are committed to the

continuation of mathematics learning sessions in order to better understand mathematical

concepts especially fragments. The mathematics classroom will be particularly interested in the

success of their support, availability of funding, marketing of their services, the resources they

use, and delivery methods.

On the other hand, the governing body may need to determine its financial position,

establish a positive impact on the study, and evaluate the results of the mathematical exchange.

Therefore, following a post-test study, many teachers argued that this would have a significant
DESIGN PROJECT
11

impact on their teaching success by eliminating certain common mistakes during childbirth.

Similarly, the workshop also developed teaching skills that provide teachers with the necessary

skills to integrate the basics.

Finally, the teaching staff was able to create a positive framework that allows students

and institutional perspectives to be considered in the development of the program. The

framework involves rolling out these programs through a continuous bivariate program that

looks at program development from an institutional perspective and student perception. Statistics

indicate that students who will be at these workshops are more likely to outperform those who do

not and that progress is due to mathematical learning activities. According to the data collected,

students argued that the workshop should focus more on their knowledge of the components. It is

also clear that 85% of these students and teachers all support a math workshop. Assessment has

shown progress in teaching methods which is why improve the performance of fractions as

shown below.
DESIGN PROJECT
12

Fraction Positive mindset

Workshop Agenda
VENUE: Ortoire School Library
4th -18th March, 2020

Wednesday, 4th March 2020

TOPIC: Going back to basics: Addition and subtraction of fractions using common
denominators

9:00 a.m. - 9:15 a.m. Reception

9:15 a.m. - 9:45 a.m. Introduction/welcome
9:45 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. Presentation: Fundamentals of teaching fractions at Elementary level
10:15 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. - 10:45 a.m. Fraction talks: review: tenets, concepts, skills, theory
10:45 a.m. - 11:15 a.m. Case Study: Teacher reflection
11:15 a.m. - 12:00 a.m. Group Discussion/Open Forum

Wednesday, 11th March 2020

TOPIC: Remodeling fraction tasks: addition and subtraction of fractions using

common denominators

9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. Presentation: Fraction Classroom Video

9:30 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Fears of Fractions: Mistakes and Misconception
- Activity: analyzing students work
- Fraction Talks: challenges and approaches
10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. Fraction Talks: Mistakes
10:45 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Investigating Teaching Practice: A task of teaching: Role Play
11:45 a.m. – 12:00 a.m. Question and Answer session

Wednesday, 18th March 2020

TOPIC: Novel approaches to teaching addition and subtraction of factions using common
denominators

9:00 a.m. – 9: 20 a.m. Presentation: Methods and manipulative

DESIGN PROJECT
13

9:20 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. Fraction Talks: Manipulative

9:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. Facilitator Simulation: Lesson-Increasing the size of a recipe
10:00 a.m. -10:15 a.m. Fraction Talks: Group Problem solve
10:15 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m. Presentation: Classroom strategies
10:45 a.m. - 11:15 a.m. Fraction Talks: Strategies
11:15 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. Workshop Review Sessions in Effect
11:15 a.m. – 12:00 a.m. Program Evaluation
DESIGN PROJECT 14
DESIGN PROJECT
15

Explanation/Discussion on the workshop design

The Fraction Positive Mindset workshop (FPMW) centered upon the nature of the problem and

the possible solutions to alter teaching by outlining objectives and planning the workshop around

such. Learning is done by demonstrating strategies, pushing teachers to become highly analytical

thinkers, confronting their fears of mathematics itself and realizing how these fears are

transferred to classroom instructions. Teachers experience a workshop of a different kind with a

focus on change mindset. FPMW presented change ideologies, concepts and information based

on a relevant topic that have been viewed by many school of thought as being the most

challenging to teach. It is therefore important to note that “the trainer must always keep the

trainee in mind throughout the process of instructional design” Romiszowiski (cited in Rowland

& Ruthven, 2011). As such this workshop breaks away from the conventional customs of

viewing the teacher as a receptacle but rather it takes a systematic and holistic view of all the

stakeholders involved (students, teachers) i.e. review of classroom teaching videos, analyzing

case studies and students homework to name a few. Teachers content and pedagogical

knowledge were viewed as part of the problem of poor performance and supporting their subject

knowledge will lead to the overall enhancements in standards. This is exactly what the workshop

aimed to accomplish.

It is critical that the training techniques and strategies simultaneously engage the

affective, cognitive, and psychomotor domains in order to assure maximum penetration of

learning. The affective domain is best engaged when the participant’s works with supplemental

materials that are visually engaging and make the material spring to life (case studies, videos,

role-play and manipulative). The psychomotor domain is engaged when working with those
DESIGN PROJECT
16

materials which requires the participant to complete physical actions that are straightforward,

meaningful and that can be logically associated with the abstract operations being modelled.

The workshop activities allow for the trainer/facilitator to direct attention to the power

point presentation or other content material being used. This will be done through the use of

visual, pictorial and verbal means. Verbal instructions and discussions are done through fractions

talk, question and answering which facilitates for the trainer/facilitator to give cues, guide the

discussion, explain concepts, theories and rules that will provide the necessary framework for

what is to be learned. Patrick (1992), argued that participants learning and retaining can be

improved if the facilitator includes orienting tasks such as;

Questions- this was included at different points in the workshop to stimulate thinking,

gauge where participants are in terms of their understanding and encourage them to verbalize

their thoughts to get feedback on material/activities that they may not fully comprehend. This

feedback can be disseminated from the trainer/facilitator and or other participants.

The FPMW feedback is participative in the form of role playing, teaching lessons, having

discussions and playing with manipulatives to have fun whilst problem solving. Engaging

participants in the use of manipulatives can be used as a strategy to make lessons more hands on

thus allowing them to construct their own ideas and knowledge. Teachers often neglect using

manipulatives in classroom as some view it as a distraction, time consuming and others are

simply not trained to teach using such.

Teachers constructing ideas will be further examined with workshop activities such as;

analysing student’s classroom work and case study- when teachers analyse students thinking they

also engage in preforming the mathematical tasks for themselves in addition to practising mental

math (Schifer, Bastable & Leater, 2000). This makes good for brainstorming of ideas, solutions
DESIGN PROJECT
17

as well as sharing of strategies and knowledge. Practice, rehearsal, imagining and reflection

engage participants in learning and understanding.

The above workshop activities include many student-sensitive strategies that are engaging to

make fraction teaching and learning more effective. Naiser et. al. (2009) stated that “teachers can

improve students’ fraction learning by placing more emphasis on examining and improving the

design of their instruction.”

Evaluation of the Design

The workshop used a variety of methods to ensure the successful delivery of that

information to the intended audience. A variety of methods were used to improve the

understanding of fractions among students using simple methods. For example, adding and

subtracting fractions using standard deodorizes, adjusting functions in the component, and the

use of novel techniques to teach the insertion and removal of fractions. Firstly, post-interview

questionnaires were created and comment forms are distributed to everyone to record their

answers. This has helped to achieve that the teaching methods used are fun and easy to use for

students. Almost enough, most of the answers in this section revealed that readers liked the

simple methods used and were completely satisfied with the explanations provided.

As Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick's model explains below the second level, research shows that

85% of students actually understood the methods used. Post-interview discussions were

conducted and compared with previous discussions prior to the test to assess how well the

students understood these methods. Similarly, printed tests were conducted that provided

constructive feedback on new skills, knowledge, and attitudes developed by students. Both pre-

test and post-test tests were performed to measure how much training participants had learned.
DESIGN PROJECT
18

Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick goes on to explain in his third article that immediate tests may not

work as each character changes over time. However, research and observations were conducted

to evaluate the dramatic changes. It became clear, then, that different methods were available to

teachers and that they used them in their classroom. Eventually, the workshop was successful as

it achieved its key objectives. After the use of the control group test, student math scores

improved slightly which is why it worked best in parts.

Given the nature of the workshop it is of utmost importance that participants were given ample

time to implement the strategies and other teaching methodologies that were taught in the

workshop. The strengths and weaknesses of each aspects taught must be examined with

feedback. For the purpose of this research process and product evaluation was taken into

consideration. Process evaluation was done via a pre and post workshop open ended and rating

scale questionnaire respectively. Thus allowing participants to express their perceptions of the

workshop format, usefulness and anticipated benefits. Product evaluation continued after the

workshop have been completed. This type of evaluative measures deals with measuring the

outcomes produced by an instructional programme as well as FPW. Therefore, as a result two

weeks after the workshop a product evaluation was done via questionnaire using survey monkey

asking participants to reflect in their use of the workshop content skills that they were taught and

used in their classrooms. The FPW also included a built in evaluative exercises and (role playing,

questions and answers) processes which allowed for the trainer to gauge participant’s responses,

reflections and get real time qualitative feedback on how the workshop is progressing.

Methodology
DESIGN PROJECT
19

This section describes the methods used in my research such as data collection methods,

analytical methods, and allows method selection. Under this study, both the measurement and

application methods were used. Measurement data includes price sizes and does not require

encoding and where quality requires encoding. Questionnaires were coded before they were

distributed to participants. Ideally, visual, open and closed questions were used extensively

during the assessment. However, the measurement method used a chronological sequence that

was fully followed as described below.

Population and sample.

The number of people in the study was made up of teachers, students and other

participants; however, participants are considered only under the auspices of the acquisition of

skills. When the sample was taken from the people where the study was conducted. Various

methods were used here to calculate the sample to be used. Sampling methods were also used as

systematic samples. The process was guided by the figure below.

Figure 1

Demographics
DESIGN PROJECT
20

Under this category, different metals were used for different measurements in the study

questions. As a source of tools, details of how it was organized, some quiet details, authenticity,

and assurance information.

The process

After the survey questions, data were collected using questionnaires, interviews and

observational methods. A variety of open-ended and open-ended questions were presented. This

gave participants the opportunity to write down their reactions and opinions on various topics.

This approach is widely accepted by teachers as they have expressed their concerns regarding the

teaching frameworks.

Research projects

This is a real structure that shows the time at which data was collected when the

intervention was initiated, and how many groups were involved. The table below shows the

research design used.

Table 1.
DESIGN PROJECT
21

From the research design above, data was collected at the time of workshop. Both

qualitative and quantitative data was obtained at the same time and also involved one group. It

was then implemented later and results were fully revised before they were released.

Table 2 shows the summary of research design.

variables Participants (N = x)
Mathematics workshop Academic
performance
Achievement The wide range
achievement Test
(WRAT – III)

Data analysis.

Design: The appropriate method uses a relating method with a descriptive design.

Descriptive mathematical analyzes were performed in sample groups to obtain a clear

mathematical understanding. Also included are moderate trends like Median, mean, range, and
DESIGN PROJECT
22

others. Bivariate-related correlation analyzes were also compiled to examine the potential for

directing the relationship between mathematical thinking and academic achievement.

In summary, the results show that the workshop has good agreements on efficiency in

fractional mathematics studies. In addition, teachers have also approved these methods as

building materials have been shown to be effective in teaching. It was also noted that the

workshop achieved its stated objectives as most students and teachers benefited from it.

Data Collection Method

Data will be collected using the following instruments to evaluate the effectiveness of this design
project:

 Observations- this will be done during each workshop session

 Questionnaires- Pre and post questionnaires administered prior to and after the workshop
would have been completed

Data Analysis and Presentation of the findings

The survey instruments (see appendix B) was distributed to four (4) teachers attached to the

OGPS. The following represents data collected and analyzed for said population.

Q. 4. The group gave a high priority to discussing mathematics and students thinking.

25%

50%

25%

Strongly disagree Disagree

Agree Strongly agree
DESIGN PROJECT
23

Figure 1. Pie chart depicting participant’s response to group priority to discussing mathematics
and student thinking

The chart indicates that fifty percent (50%) of respondents agreed that the workshop gave high

priority to discussing mathematics and student thinking, whilst twenty five percent each (25%) of

the remaining respondents agree and disagree respectively. The results suggests that having

discussions centered on students and their thinking as it relates to math was well accepted.

5. What  is  one  thing  that  worked  well?

Practical
25%
Creative &
Insightful
50%

Interactive
25%

Creative & Insightful Interactive Practical

Not at all useful
Figure 2, shows a pie chart depicting participants responses to what worked well.

The above chart indicates that fifty percent (50%) of the participants found the workshop to be

creative and insightful, whilst twenty five percent (25%) each viewed as being practical and

interactive. Zero percent (0%) stated that it was not at all useful. From the data it could be stated

that the workshop provided a change and relevant information to participants.

6. What  is  one  thing you would like to see done differently?

DESIGN PROJECT
24

Lon
ger
Chart Title
ses
sio Incl
ns ud
25 e
% mo
re
tea
Onl che
ine rs
wo 50
rks %
Include more
ho teachers
p
Online workshop sessions
ses
Longer sessions
sio
ns
25
%

Figure 3. Pie chart depicting participant’s responses to workshop changes

The data indicates that fifty percent (50%) of participants insisted that the workshop be offered

to more of their colleagues, whilst twenty five percent (25%) stated to provide online sessions

and the remaining twenty five percent (25%) suggests to have more sessions available.

Modifications of the Design

Longer workshop sessions: from discussions with participants it was realized that the workshop

could be extended beyond the three days period and timeframe. This will be considered in order

to make sure that participants are given every opportunity to grasp, analyze and give feedbacks

when it comes to workshop activities.

Online Workshop sessions: this is a major aspect that will be considered especially at present

where the world is dealing with the new normal due to covid-19. This can be done well through

zoom. Additionally, videos and group chats will be readily available. Participants will be able to

view and review workshop materials, references at their own time and pace, thus providing for

modern learning. Considerations will have be taken that some persons may not be computer

savvy.
DESIGN PROJECT
25

Teachers from different standards: fractions are taught from infants to standard five. As a

result and because teachers are re-assigned to different classes it is seen as relevant to include the

entire teaching staff as it relates to learning new strategies in order to shape and develop both the

teachers and students mindset to allow continuity and success at a younger age.

Feedback: due to the concepts taught at the FPW there should be at least a month given to

participants before they would be provided with a follow up survey to assess which concepts,

ideas and strategies they would have used and how effective they were. In addition, the trainer

can sit in during a classroom session to observe a lesson being delivered and provide some sort

of coaching or mentorship.

Discussion and Conclusion

The designing and implementation of the FPMW took a lot of planning in order to get off the

ground. Members of staff anticipated the start of the workshop as a mean to gain additional

knowledge that will be readily needed to help their students and themselves improve on their

academic performance. The results have indicated that the workshop was successful however,

there was a need to make modification in order to avoid teachers loosing valuable classroom

time to the workshop, by including online learning. The feedback and support attached echoed

that the activities at the workshop were deigned to promote student thinking, understanding and

teachers embracing how content knowledge affects performance. It is the overall belief that the

information attained during the workshop is utilized during classroom sessions, lesson planning

and shared with other teachers at different levels.

DESIGN PROJECT
26

References
Akus, M. (2012). Student Performance in Dealing with Fractions. Journal of Educational
Research

Ball, D.L., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to
teach: Knowing and using mathematics.
Burgstahler, S. (2009). Universal Design of Instruction (UDI): Definition, Principles, Guidelines
and Examples. University of Washington

De Silva, R. SEA results show lowest scores in Math since 2010. Retrieved 2019.
https://www.cnc3.co.tt/press-release/sea-results-show-lowest-scores-math-2010

Dorward, J. (2002). Intuition and research. Are they compatible? Teaching Children
Mathematics

Gabriel, F., Coche, F., Szucs, D., Carette, V., Rey, B., & Content, B. (2013, October 10). A
componential view of children's difficulties in learning fractions. Frontiers in
Psychology. Retrieved from
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00715/full.

Gaetano, G. (2014, June 30). The effectiveness of using manipulatives to teach fractions.
Master of Science Thesis, Department of Psychology, Rowan University. Retrieved from
https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1494&context=etd.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Leacock, C. J.  (2016). Investigating Mathematics Teaching and Learning in the Eastern
Caribbean: A report on a research project supported by the Caribbean Development
Bank.  

Leacock, C. J.  (2015). Status of mathematics education in the Eastern Caribbean: Issues and
possible solutions for teacher preparation and support.  Journal of Eastern Caribbean
Studies, 40(3), 210-23

Mendes, I. A., & da Silva, C. A. F. (2018). Problematization and Research as a Method of

Teaching Mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics
Education, 13(2), 41-55.

Ministry of Education. Draft Education Policy Paper 2017-2022.

Ministry of Education. Mathematics Resources. https://www.moe.gov.tt/mathematics-resources/.

Retrieved 2019.

Ministry of Education. SEA 2019-2013 Framework.

DESIGN PROJECT
27

Morson, D., Cramer, K., & Ahrendt, K. (2020, February 2). Using models to build fraction
understanding. Mathematics Teacher: Learning & Teaching 113(2). Retrieved from
https://pubs.nctm.org/view/journals/mtlt/113/2/article-p117.xml?print&print.
Naiser, E. A., Wright, W. E., & Capraro, R. M. (2009, November 3). Teaching fractions:
Strategies used for teaching fractions to middle grades students. Journal of Reseach in
Childhood Education 18(3). Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02568540409595034.

N a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t of E d u c a t i o n a l P rogres s (2001). National assessment of

educational progress. R e t r i eved F e b r u a r y 18, 2003, from
h t t p : / / w w w . d o e . k1 2. ga . u s / s l a / r e t / n a e p . h t m l

N a t i o n a l Council of Teachers of M a t h e m a t i c s . (2000). Principl es a n d s t a n d a r d s

for school mathematics

National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: US Department

Origin Learning. (2015). 4 Ways to Apply the Situated Learning Theory. Retrieved 2019.
https://blog.originlearning.com/4-ways-to-apply-the-situated-learning-theory/

Pappas, C. (2015). Instructional Design Models and Theories: The Situated Cognition Theory
and The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model. https://elearningindustry.com/situated-
cognition-theory-and-cognitive-apprenticeship-model. Retrieved 2019.

Reiter, A. B., & Davis, S. N. (2011). Factors Influencing Pre-Service Teachers' Beliefs about
Student Achievement: Evaluation of a Pre-Service Teacher Diversity Awareness
Program. Multicultural Education, 19(3), 41-46.

Rowland, T., & Ruthven, K. (2011), Mathematical Knowledge in Teaching, Mathematics.

Schiftcr, D., Bastablc, V., & Russell, S. J. (withYaffee, L, Lester, J. B., & Cohen, S.) (1999.
D eveloping mathematical ideas number and operations part 2: Making meaning
for operations case book

Strother, S., Brendefur, J. L., Thiede, K., & Appleton, S. (2016, February 1). Five key ideas to
teach fractions and decimals with understanding. Boise State University. Retrieved
from https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1159&context=cifs_facpubs.

T i r o s h , D. (2000). E n h a n c i n g p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s k n o w l e d g e of c h i l d r e n ' s
c o n c e p t i o n s : T h e c a s e o f d i v i s i o n o f f r a c t i o n s . J o u r n a l for R e s e a r c h
Mathematics Education

Tucker, K. 2005. Mathematics through play in the early years, London: Sage.

T z u r , R. (1999). An i n t e g r a t e d s t u d y o f c h i l d r e n 's cons t r u c t i o n of i m p r o p e r

fractions a n d t h e t e a c h e r 's role in promoting t h a t l e a r n i n g . J o u r n a l for
DESIGN PROJECT
28

Research in M a t h e m a tics E d u c a t i o n , 30 , 390-417.

Wu, H. (2010). Teaching Fractions in Elementary School: A manual for teachers. Retrieved
2020. https://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/fractions1998.pdf
DESIGN PROJECT
29
Pre workshop Activities
Workshop venue should be
secured
Organize workshop content,
materials and handouts that
are relevant
Conduct pre workshop
assessment survey
Check availability of
workshop resources e.g.
projector
Familiarity with workshop
materials before hand
Table 1: The above table outlines the roles or the trainer/facilitator
Table 1: The above table outlines the roles or the trainer/facilitator
Appendix A
Fraction Positive Mindset.
Role of trainer/facilitator
Workshop Activities
Demonstrate and explain
concepts and skill practice
Elicits participants response
to instructional materials
using guided questions,
exercises and role play
Use learner’s prior
knowledge to get
understanding
Guides the workshop by
engaging participants
reactions during activities by
oral questioning
Provides feedback to
participants regarding their
concerns
Observe participants
reactions during workshop
activities
Post workshop Activities
Conduct post workshop
evaluations to rate the
usefulness of the workshop
Trainer feedback form
Observe participants
classroom activity and
provide feedback and
scaffolding as deem fit
Continuous development and
updating of training content
in response to changing needs
etc.
Provide feedback on the
outcomes and the
implications
 DESIGN PROJECT
30

Fraction Positive Mindset Workshop Unit Outline

Week Period Objectives Activities Input Outcome

Week 1 9am-12pm To introduce participants Introductory PPT Presenter, video Educational
to the fundamentals and on fractions, theory, demo, ppt ( see practitioners
Introduction: (3hrs) applications of the use of skills and concepts appendix), will have the
Understanding relevant concepts, theory fraction blocks, necessary
Fractions and skills relating to Fraction talks: training skills and
mathematics and Questions and handouts competencies
Fundamentals
fractions answer session as it that are
relates to the ppt. required for
the
integration of
Going back to To introduce the Case study: fractions
basics: Addition approaches and Teacher reflection fundamental
and subtraction of importance of working (see appendix)
with unit fractions being
fractions using
the key to all work with
common fractions Group Discussion
denominators on case study

Week 2 9am-12pm To provide training to Analyzing students Presenter, video Recognizing

help students avoid classroom work demo, ppt, common
Remodeling (3hrs) adding/minus the with the view of venue, fraction mistakes in
fraction tasks: denominators when blocks, lesson instruction
identifying patterns
addition and adding/subtracting plan delivery
fractions
subtraction using Fraction Talks: Improvement
common Challenges, in teaching
denominators approaches and proficiency
misconceptions and change
instruction
delivery to
Role play: draft and
suit
teach lesson plan
Teach a lesson on
with the newly
addition/subtraction of Determine
 DESIGN PROJECT
31

fractions to be evaluated acquired knowledge students

by the group prior
Question and knowledge
Answer session of fractions

Interpreting
students
explanations
strategies
they implore
to solve
fractions
Week 3 9am-12pm Identify and demonstrate Presentation on Presenter, video Awareness
different strategies to methods and demo, ppt, of the need
Novel approaches (3hrs) teach fractions using manipulative venue, fraction to spice up
to teaching manipulative blocks, teaching
addition and Fraction Talks: manipulative and styles and
subtraction of Manipulative handout methods
factions using (importance, types used in the
common etc.) classroom
denominators
Facilitator
Simulation: Lesson-
Adopt
Increasing the size of
a recipe variations in
demonstrate to the instruction
workshop delivery
participants using a
towards
variety of
instructional multisensory
strategies learning
approaches
Fraction talk:
Group problem
solve the lesson

Use different strategies to Presentation:

teach fractions Classroom
strategies (games,
number line,
manipulative, etc)

Fraction Talks:
Strategies

Workshop Review
Evaluation Sessions in Effect
DESIGN PROJECT
32

Training workshop
participant
evaluation form

To determine
the workshop
quality/
success and
or failure
rates with the
view of
improving
the projected
workshop
outcomes

Pre Training Questionnaire

1. Have you ever been to a mathematics workshop?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

2. Why are you attending the Fraction Positive Mindset Workshop?

_______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
DESIGN PROJECT
33

3. What knowledge and skills would you like to acquire at this workshop?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4. Can this knowledge and these skills be applied in your classroom or other activities?
If so, how?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

5. What do you think is the most important issue to be discussed in the workshop?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

Appendix B

Fraction Positive Mindset Workshop

Post Evaluation   Form

Rating  Scale: 1 2 3 4 5
Strongly  Disagree Strongly  Agree

1.  ____  Group  members  gave  different  points  of  view  respectful  consideration  even  when
there  was  disagreement  or  the  ideas  were  unpopular.

2.  ____ I  felt  I  had  opportunities  to  comment,  whether  or  not  I  contributed  during  the
discussion.
DESIGN PROJECT
34

3.  ____ Members  built  on  and  contributed  to  each  other’s  ideas.  Members  asked
questions  about  each  other’s  ideas.

4.  ____ The  group  gave  a  high  priority  to  discussing  the  mathematics  and  student
thinking.

5.____ What  is  one  thing  that  worked  well?

6.  ____  What  is  one  thing you would like to see done differently?

7. ____ How likely are you to attend future workshops?

Note: Adapted from Mathematics Case Methods Project, directed by Came Barnett, WcstEd © 2000
DESIGN PROJECT
35