P a g e |0

ACTION RESEARCH REPORT

Math Reflection in the 2nd Grade Classroom

Jule Peterson

Classroom Action Research EDET673

Dr. Virgil Fredenberg, Ph.D.

April 28th, 2018

University of Alaska Southeast

 P a g e |1

Table of Contents
Background………………………………………………………………………….2

Review of Literature…………….………………………………………………3

Project Description………………………………………………………………5

Data Collection……………………………….……………………………………6

Analysis of Data…………………………….……………………………………..8

Conclusion………………………………………….……………………………...12

Implications..…………….……………………………….……………………….13
 P a g e |2

Background
Many areas of education have transformed into a practice of reflection by allowing students to

take ownership of their learning. The teacher is no longer tasked with being the only bowl of

knowledge. We expect our students to feel accountable for their progress and retention of new

knowledge, as well.

The following research came about after a reflection on my own practice. I noticed that in the

first trimester of school, from the months September to November, there was a large gap

between students understanding of their math skills and how they were actually performing. The

intention of this study is aiming to see whether young students can gain a better understanding of

their math performance by looking at their scores—commonly known as reflection. If they are

given more opportunities to reflect on their scores, then will their math scores improve?

The tests were delivered through a computer or IPad. However, I felt like a large group of my

students had immense difficulty on these devices. In attempt to eliminate testing factors and

collect data on their true performance, I offered a paper test to those who scored below 70% on

the digital test. I chose 70% because anything lower is below proficient. Measuring student’s

ability on computer and paper provided multiple opportunities to collect authentic data. I used

the paper test data to see which students truly understood the content and which ones continued

to struggle. Each graph could then be pieces of the bigger picture to see if there were any trends

or patterns through the reflection process.

 P a g e |3

Review of Literature
The following literature helped give more direction or understanding to the study. I chose these

articles or journals to support mathematical reflection and conducting a study. These articles

highlighted the importance of self-reflection, specifically in math. They support a common

language of growth mindset, which has encouraged my students to keep trying and see their math

ability in a different light. These articles have helped both my students and myself to see growth

between the pretest and posttest, rather than looking only at the cumulative score.

Student Self-Reflection in Mathematics

Written by Donna Boucher, this article emphasizes the importance of giving students the skills to

navigate their own reflection. Teaching students how to reflect on their math skills can equip

kids with the ability to own their learning. Instead of the teacher telling students their ability,

students can analyze their data themselves. They are able to see strengths and weaknesses using

age appropriate language. I chose this article because of its growth mindset vs. fixed mindset

message and the tips it offers for self-reflection at a young age.

Broucher, D. 2016. Encouraging Student Self-Reflection. Retrieved from

http://www.mathcoachscorner.com/2016/10/student-self-reflection/

Mathematical Self-Reflection Continued

The ability to know what questions to ask students to engage self-reflection is the simplest way

to implement this concept. I chose this resource because it is written by fellow teachers. It

provided my study sets of questions to prompt student’s reflection before, during, or after math.

This helped provide an outline for target reflection questions.

 P a g e |4

21 Century Learning Academy. 2011. The 40 Reflection Questions. Retrieved from

https://backend.edutopia.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/stw/edutopia-stw-replicatingPBL-

21stCAcad-reflection-questions.pdf

Asking Students Questions

As I began the qualitative data collection, I wanted to find resources that gave great ideas for

getting students to reflect. This article has very broad questions that don’t necessarily pertain to

math, yet I found it useful in creating my questionnaires. This resource has been one that I

frequented as I put more emphasis on reflection. The 10 questions it offers are great for all

subjects, all ages, and at all points in the year. I chose this site to find common language for

reflection and to get ideas for what I could ask students.

Stockman, A. 2015. Ten reflection questions to ask at the end of class. Retrieved from

http://www.brilliant-insane.com/2015/03/ten-reflective-questions-ask-end-class.html

Data Collection

Student data collection is about compiling information in order to see trends and patterns to help

better meet student’s needs. “Teachers can use students’ data analysis to identify factors that may

motivate student performance and then adjust their instruction to better meet students’ needs.” I

chose this site to understand how I can use the data I collect in the most productive way.

NAESP. Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making. Retrieved

from

http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Achievement_blue.pdf
 P a g e |5

Project Description

The purpose of this study is to see what happens to student’s math performance with consistent

reflection on their pre and posttest scores. The study will be done from September through April

with the main data collection occurring January through April. The population in this study are

fifteen second grade students.

Previously, math comprehension in my classroom consisted of very little to no reflection.

Students would learn the material, take a test, and then move to the next topic. In an attempt to

give students more accountability of their learning, I have implemented more reflective practices

for my students, specifically in mathematics.

The first part of this study was observing pretest and posttest scores. For every topic, students

took a pretest. Three weeks later they did a computerized posttest. With both pre and posttest

scores, students were able to reflect on their growth. This reflection allowed students to gain a

better understanding of how much progress they made on a 0 to 100% scale.

An additional part of this study measured growth through paper tests only. Students who scored a

70% or less are considered below proficient. In order to measure growth without the interference

of technology, they took a paper test as well. This data showed me an additional way to measure

their growth in relation to reflection. Through this lens, I could analyze if consistent reflection on

the pre and posttests was benefitting these students.

 P a g e |6

Data Collection and Methodology

The quantitative data comes from the pretests, posttests, and paper tests. I compiled this data into

a series of bar graphs based on the topic. The paper tests were kept on an excel spreadsheet to see

how a student did on Topic X online test compared to Topic X paper test.

The data collection began by observing the trends of the entire class in trimester 1. These trends

can show how successful students were with each topic, regardless of the medium.

Through the months of January to May, I collected the quantitative data. This data came from the

pre and posttests in four math topics. The reflection piece occurred when students would receive

the pre and posttest scores. Their goal was to look for areas of struggle and improvements.

Ideally, a student could see how much they improved from the first test to the last test. Then,

students would conference with me and discuss their findings. Questions I would ask: Did you

improve, stay the same, or go down? Why do you think it was hard at first and then you

understood it? Why did you not understand it? What area do you hope to improve?

The qualitative data came from these conferences and a survey on their ability in math. I also

took observational notes to see if student’s attitudes changed as they grew more comfortable with

reflection. These observations are used to amplify the hard data with qualitative, unmeasurable,

data.

Part one:

In the beginning stages of this research, I categorized students into areas of above proficient,

proficient, below proficient and far below proficient in math comprehension. This initial

categorizing helped see the movement of each student during the research.
 P a g e |7

Part two:

Each data collection period followed the same format. Students completed a pretest and then

they were put into three or four different groups depending on their score of the pretest. These

groups were to differentiate their learning needs. This is important to the study because I could

ask the appropriate reflection questions to each group depending on their needs. For example, the

group that struggled with a topic would get a question such as, “What do you find frustrating

about this?” Compared to a middle-high group I might ask, “How could you teach this to

someone else?” These questions help students gain the self-reflection skills. Which in turn, help

them analyze their own test scores more organically.

Part three:

Students took the posttest on a computer. These scores were compared to their pretest scores.

Students who scored below 70% on their posttest were given a secondary posttest on paper. As

aforementioned, I wanted data that showed me who really knew the topic without the

interference of technology.

Using computers for tests can be a barrier for some students, which is why I gave them the

opportunity to show their understanding on paper. Positive patterns or trends among students

who consistently failed the computerized tests would show they were still making growth.
 P a g e |8

Analysis of Data
Quantitative Data Analysis:

According to the series of bar graphs, students who completed both the pretest and the posttest

experienced growth in their math ability. This growth was not linear and seemed to be subjective

to many factors outside of reflection.

Class Average Score on Computer Math Tests

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Topic 5 Topic 6 Topic 7 Topic 8 Topic 9 Topic 10 Topic 11 Topic 12

I collected class average test scores to see if the scores would show an increased trend once the

reflecting began on Topic 9-12. There is no trend to the data. I also took into account that many

students experience testing anxiety when on a computer. I gave them an alternate test to see if

they performed better on a paper test. These scores were used to give students who scored under

70% to prove they do understand the content.

 P a g e |9

Paper vs. Online Tests

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Online Topic Paper Topic Online Topic Paper Topic Online Topic Paper Topic Online topic Paper Topic
6 6 5 5 6 6 7 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

The different colors represent different students. On the X axis is the online topic test and Y axis

is the paper test. In general, students scored better on the paper topic test. I can conclude that not

all students can show their true knowledge through a digital medium.

The following set of graphs are individual scores on the pre and posttest for each topic. After this

initial pretest, students look at the incorrect and correct questions. Any incorrect question was

solved to see where they made a mistake. Once the posttest was taken, I gave students both tests

back to compare the two scores. This is when the main reflection occurred as I asked them to

solve any problems that were incorrect and then would ask a series of questions. We would look

at the pre and posttest scores and notice whether they improved, stayed the same, or decreased.
 P a g e | 10

Students who scored 40% or less

on the pre-test scored 80% to 95%

on the post-test. This shows an

average increase of about 240%.

Students who scored 40% or less on the

pre-test scored 59% to 75% on the post-

test. This shows an average increase of

about 150%. This specific data shows a

trend that does not support reflection for

improvement. Those who scored above

60% on the pre-test scored the highest

on the post-test. Students who initially

scored low did not show more than an

80% growth.

Students who scored 40% or less on the

pre-test scored 200% better on the post-test.

Students 3, 8, 9, and 13 even scored lower

on their post-test. This specific data shows

a trend that does not support reflection for

improvement.
 P a g e | 11

Qualitative Data Analysis:

Students took a survey about their ability in math before the consistent reflection began. They

took the same survey at the end of the year. This data was then measured to see if they gained

confidence or ability in math.

Math Survey in October

I understand math really well I can understand most math

Math is confusing I do not understand math

Math Survey in April

I understand math really well I can understand most math

Math is confusing I do not understand math
 P a g e | 12

This data shows that there was an increase in confidence and ability. Although the quantitative

data may not attest to this trend, the personal feelings and thoughts of each student were affected

through the year. Most students who felt bad at math at the beginning of the year gained more

confidence towards the end. This may be due to the amount of different math they were exposed

to this year compared to 1st and kindergarten. Other outside factors may include, more

confidence in the classroom or embracing the growth mindset model after months of discussion.

Another factor could be that students had no idea what their skills were in math at the beginning

of the year. After learning how to reflect and understand their math scores, students had a better

idea of their math ability at the end of the year.

Conclusions

Subject and variability is a clear factor in determining academic performance. Assessing the

qualitative and quantitative data, at this point, is inconclusive as to whether reflection improves

math ability. The qualitative data can attest that there are benefits to students analyzing their

ability in math. Talking and discussing areas of strengths and weaknesses among 2nd grade

students did help them feel more accountable of their learning. However, whether this helped

them improve in math is inclusive at this time.

The quantitative data provides a clear pattern for student’s ability individually and as a whole.

Individually, the data shows the topics where the most growth occurred. As a whole, the data

shows what topics were understood by all students and which topics may have been more

difficult. The quantitative does not clearly explain whether the ability to reflect on the pre-test

affected the posttest positively. Overall, the data collected is inconclusive as to whether

reflection in mathematics helps students improve their overall ability.

 P a g e | 13

Implications

This study will need an entire school year of consistent data collection to produce clear findings

and results. The additional research will provide a broader picture of the whole child and their

growth and mindset as they gain reflection skills.

The next steps for this study will be to start the following school year with a control group and

treatment group. Each group will have an equal level of skill set. I can then compare the results

of the two groups. I will ask a consistent set of questions about student’s idea of reflection in

math. These questions will assess whether students have ownership over their math ability. The

questions will also be a guide for how students see themselves and their math ability at the start

of the year compared to the end of the year. My recommendations would be to produce more

quantitative data regarding student’s accountability in math. This would occur through weekly

formative assessments as students log their scores. Logging their weekly scores will be a visual

guide to their areas of strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, it will show students, teachers,

and parents what standards have been met. Not every student will understand each subject, but

every student can gain awareness and accountability of their learning.