EDMA310/360 Mathematics: Learning and Teaching Mathematics 2, 2015 Assignment 1 Template 1 of 3

Rational Number Assessment

Tess Desmond S00152856

Australian Catholic University

Teacher report on your students Rational Number Knowledge and any

misconceptions (300 words)

During the rational number interview Stephanie was able to look at a fraction pie and record what
part of the pie was shaded. She showed that she could represent a percentage and a fraction in
numerous ways, for example identified that 0.25 % could also be written as 0.250 %. She also
understood that 2/3 is equivalent to 4/6. If Stephanie did not know which fraction was bigger by
simply looking at them, she would convert the fractions in order to make their denominators the
same. This made it easy for her to compare the fractions.

Stephanie understood that the denominator shows what parts are being counted and the numerator
relates to how many of these parts. She could identify rational numbers on a number line by
converting given fractions for example she noted that six thirds is equivalent to 2 therefore 2 must
be marked on the number line. When ordering decimals a misconception that Stephanie had was
that 1.70 was bigger than 1.7. This is because she simply thought that 70 was bigger than 7
therefore they were not equivalent.

Stephanie was able to represent numbers as a fraction, decimal and percentage. When asked which
music card had better value Stephanie divided all numbers in the question by 2 but then realised that
this may not give her an accurate answer. She then converted the numbers into fractions to make it
easier to compare the two. A misconception Stephanie had was that each of the 5 girls would get
half a pizza if there were 3 pizzas. Therefore she divided the pizzas by 6 rather than 5. Stephanie
was able to compare two fractions when they were shown to her but was misconceived when asked
about fractions using worded problems.
 EDMA310/360 Mathematics: Learning and Teaching Mathematics 2, 2015 Assignment 1 Template 1 of 3

Critical evaluation of the usefulness of mathematics interviews for gaining

knowledge about students current mathematical knowledge that can be used to
plan future learning opportunities. Be sure to draw on relevant research
literature to support your evaluation. (400 words)

Teachers use mathematics interviews in order to gather insights into students current thinking and
knowledge. Mathematics interviews are tools that can give teachers direction of where to go next
with students therefore benefiting both the teacher and the student. However if the teacher is not
prepared prior to taking the interview, the purpose and benefits associated with the interview may
be lost.

Fennema, Carpenter, Franke, Levi & Empson (1996) discuss the importance of asking open-ended
questions in an interview such as How did you figure that out?, or Can you give me another
example to explain your thinking? Asking these types of questions provide the students with a
range of possible answers therefore encouraging them to justify and explain their thinking.

Clarke, Mitchell & Roche (2005) speak of growth points and how they informed the
implementation of interview tasks. Teachers can use growth points to find out how much students
know in relation to certain topics. The data gathered in relation to the growth points can help
teachers see what the child knows and what areas may need further attention. Clark et al (2005) also
suggest the use of various objects in the interview in order to engage and make the interview an
enjoyable experience for the student rather than a daunting one. Interviews give teachers the
opportunities to learn information about students in which they may not learn in a group context.

However there are some difficulties and limitations involved with mathematics interviews. It can be
difficult for teachers to find the time to interview each and every student individually during their
busy schedules. The preparation and conduction of the interview requires time and effort therefore
time constraints are a problem associated with interviews. Moyer and Milewicz (2002) speak of
things that should be avoided when conducting an interview. These include check listing therefore
the teacher should not have to be checking the script over and over. The teacher needs to be
prepared prior to the interview and take initiative during the interview by asking prompting
questions rather than just checking answers off.

For interviews to be effective they need to be conducted appropriately. The student needs to be
focused throughout the interview and the teacher needs to be prepared with all required materials
and a familiarity with the appropriate script. The teacher will not benefit from the interview if the
test is just a series of yes/no questions therefore encouragement for explanations must be made by
the teacher. Overall when used correctly, mathematics interviews are a great way for teachers to
assess students knowledge and implement further teaching.

References

Clarke, Mitchell, & Roche. (2005). Student one-to-one assessment interviews in mathematics: A

powerful tool for teachers. Retrieved from

https://www.mav.vic.edu.au/files/conferences/2005/doug-clarke.pdf
 EDMA310/360 Mathematics: Learning and Teaching Mathematics 2, 2015 Assignment 1 Template 1 of 3

Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Jacobs, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal

study of learning to use childrens thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for

Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 403-434. Retrieved from DOI:

10.2307/749875

Moyer, P. S., & Milewicz, E. (2002). Learning to question: Categories of questioning used by

pre-service teachers during diagnostic mathematics interviews. Journal of Mathematics

Teacher Education, 5, 293-315.

 EDMA310/360 Mathematics: Learning and Teaching Mathematics 2, 2015 Assignment 1 Template 1 of 3

Critical evaluation of the usefulness of Open Tasks with Rubrics for gaining
knowledge about students current mathematical knowledge that can be used to
plan future learning opportunities. Be sure to draw on relevant research
literature to support your evaluation. (400 words)

Open tasks and rubrics are commonly used assessment tools by teachers in the mathematics
classroom. They can be beneficial to students learning in a number of ways however there are also
limitations involved if they are not used appropriately or are found as intimidating for students.

Varygiannes (2013) speaks positively of open tasks in the mathematics classroom. He believes that
they encourage students to partake in higher-order thinking. An open task has no set answer, which
allows students to achieve more than one answer and arrive at this answer in a number of different
ways. However the downside of this may be that students feel intimidated and overwhelmed by the
task at hand therefore do not know where to start.

When partaking in open tasks students do not have to work out the question in a particular way
therefore no set procedure or rule is required. Watson & Sullivan (2008) believe that key elements
of mathematics learning are achieved through open tasks. These include students choosing their
own emphases and approach, and developing awareness of these choices. It can give students
confidence in their mathematical knowledge and also provides an opportunity for class discussion
as students can share their ways of achieving the task.

Clarke, Clarke & Sullivan (2013) speak of some difficulties that teachers may face when using open
tasks in the classroom. Some of these difficulties include students being confronted by the task, as
they do not know where to begin. Students may not be risk taskers therefore prefer questions with a
set answer and set procedure. Therefore open tasks will be great for some students but extremely
intimidating and challenging for others.

Rubrics are a way in which teachers can assess open tasks in the mathematics classroom.
Brookehart (2013) describes rubrics as a coherent set of criteria used to assess students work. For
rubrics to be effective they need to include well-written descriptions in regards to levels of
performance quality and have appropriate criteria. Rubrics created for open tasks will not state that
the student needs to achieve a set answer in order to do well therefore a range of answers are
possible. This gives students more opportunities to be successful. Teachers can even go through the
rubric with their students and show them that there are no set ways of achieving a good mark. Open
tasks do not limit students thinking and creativity which is what mathematics is all about.

References

Brookhart, S. M., & Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (2013). How to

create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading.

Clarke, D., Clarke, C., & Sullivan, P. (2013). Using content-specific open-ended tasks. In

Teaching with Tasks for Effective Mathematics Learning (pp. 57-60). Springer.
 EDMA310/360 Mathematics: Learning and Teaching Mathematics 2, 2015 Assignment 1 Template 1 of 3

Varygiannes, D. (2013). The Impact of Open-Ended Tasks. Teaching Children Mathematics,

20(5), 277-280. doi:10.5951/teacchilmath.20.5.0277

Watson, A., & Sullivan, P. (2008). Questions and prompts for mathematical thinking. In Tools

and resources in mathematics education (pp. 109-135). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.