Abstract
In this study, we explored elementary preservice teachers’ (PSTs’) competence to make diagnostic inferences about students’ levels of understanding of fractions and their approaches to developing appropriate tiered assessment items. Although recent studies have investigated beginning teachers’ diagnostic competency, teachers’ ability to design and evaluate diagnostic assessment items has remained largely underexplored. Fifty-seven PSTs, who enrolled in a mathematics methods course at a midwestern university in the U.S., participated in developing and attempting to differentiate diagnostic assessment items considering individual students’ varied levels of understanding. An inductive content analysis approach was used in identifying general patterns of PSTs’ approaches and strategies in designing and revising tiered assessment items. Our findings revealed the following: (a) the PSTs were well versed in students’ cognitive difficulties; (b) when modifying the core questions to be more or less difficult, the PSTs predominantly used strategies related to procedural fluency of the questions; and (c) some strategies PSTs used to modify questions did not necessarily yield the intended level of difficulty. Further, we discussed the challenges and opportunities teacher education programs face in teaching PSTs how to effectively design tiered assessment items.
Highlights
There is a general consensus that student learning is directly related to the quality of teaching, which largely depends on teachers’ competence in planning, instruction, and assessment [1]
This study answered the following overarching questions: (a) how do preservice teachers’ (PSTs) anticipate student confusion/difficulties in solving fraction problems? (b) what strategies do PSTs use in designing diagnostic assessments to adjust the levels of assessment tasks according to individual student thinking based on their anticipated student confusion/difficulties? and (c) how do PSTs’ strategies differ depending on target concepts or representations used in the tasks?
Three student difficulty themes emerged across all three questions: difficulties in (a) understanding basic concepts related to fractions, (b) knowing and applying rules/algorithms, and (c) understanding equivalent fractions
Summary
There is a general consensus that student learning is directly related to the quality of teaching, which largely depends on teachers’ competence in planning, instruction, and assessment [1]. There has been much work in the field of mathematics education to produce a set of concrete academic standards for what students are expected to learn Those standards themselves “do not [explicitly] define the intervention methods or materials necessary to support students who are well below or well above grade-level expectations” [11] This leaves teachers in a position where they need to make diagnostic inferences (as assessment skills) about students’ strengths and weaknesses to support student learning and to develop instruction materials reflecting student needs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
