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

Rational Number Assessment

Amy Darvell
Australian Catholic University
Teacher report on your students Rational Number Knowledge and any misconceptions

Cara has a comprehensive understanding of rational number. She is able to equally partition
and interpret part-whole problems concerning area and length models, as well as those
involving discrete sets. She is able to compare fraction pairs using a variety of strategies such
as benchmarking, her knowledge of the numerator and denominator and her understanding
of improper fractions. When comparing five-sixths and seven-eighths, Cara relied on gap
thinking, a common misconception, before demonstrating the preferred strategy of residual
thinking. Cara also exhibited a clear understanding of fractional size, as she was able to create
a sum that was close but not equal to one, using both visualisation and benchmarking. Cara
has a developing understanding of fractions and decimals as a measure. She was able to place
fractions and decimals correctly on a number line, however was unable to consistently
transfer her understanding to the metric system. Cara also has an understanding of fractions
as an operation of division as she was able to equally share three pizzas among five people.
Additionally, she exhibited a foundational understanding that a fraction can be used as an
operator to shrink or stretch a number (Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2011, p.25) as she was able
to correctly answer questions such as what is one-half of six?. However, when Cara was
asked whether 8 x 0.1 or 8 0.1 produced a larger answer, her thinking was constrained to a
whole number understanding of multiplication and division, as her comment, when you
divide you share out and when you multiply you get more, indicates that she has the
misconception that multiplication always makes bigger and division always makes smaller
(Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2011, p.25). Caras ability to order, construct and compare decimals
was underpinned by her understanding of place value, which became evident in her
explanations. She was however unable to demonstrate a sound understanding of the density
of decimal numbers, as although she identified ten decimals between 0.1 and 0.11, she has not
yet grasped the understanding that there is an infinite number of decimals between two
numbers. Furthermore, Cara demonstrated excellent problem solving and reasoning skills as
she persisted to solve the Pod Tunes or New Tunes question using her knowledge of
proportional reasoning, multiplication and division.
Word count: 334 words

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.
It is argued that the ultimate way to improve mathematics teaching and learning is to ensure
teachers understand the mathematical thought processes of their students (Fennema et al.,
1996, p.432, cited in McDonough, Clarke & Clarke, 2002). According to McDonough, Clarke &
Clarke (2002), one of the most effective ways to guarantee this, is through the implementation
of one-to-one mathematics interviews conducted by teachers with their students.
Mathematics assessment interviews give teachers significant insights into students
understanding of key mathematical ideas, and their preferred strategies in solving problems
(Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2011, p.23). Knowledge of students mathematical thinking is said
to be a prerequisite of effective instructional practices (Jenkins, 2009, p.142) and hence the
key to planning future classroom learning opportunities. Mathematics interviews allow
teachers to gain a sense of typical student learning paths, develop an awareness of common
misconceptions, allow quiet achievers to emerge and enhance their understanding of how
mathematics learning develops differently for children, through a level of discussion deemed
not possible in other forms of assessment (Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2005; Clarke, Clarke &
Roche, 2011; McDonough, Clarke & Clarke, 2002). The nature of a mathematics interview
emphasises the use of discussion, fostered through questioning, in order to gain an
understanding of students strategies and thinking. This discussion allows teachers to assess
students conceptual knowledge, which they may not have been able to demonstrate on a
written assessment (Clarke, Clarke & Roche, 2011). Although the nature of these interviews
do allow teachers to gain an understanding of student mathematical knowledge to inform
future planning, the fact that they are conducted one-on-one means that the interview process
can be quite lengthy, with each interview lasting from 30-50mins depending on the
experience of the teacher and the students responses (Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2005). On the
other hand, it is this one-on-one time that allows teachers to assess the type of mathematical
strategies individuals are engaging in, a difficult task in a whole class setting (Denvir, Askew,
Brown, & Rhodes, 2001, cited in McDonough, Clarke & Clarke, 2002). Additionally, it is
suggested that the information gained from the implementation of mathematics interviews,
improves both teachers content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Clarke,

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

Mitchell & Roche, 2011). As a result, teachers are able to plan better lessons to enhance
student leaning opportunities in the future. Likewise, mathematics interviews can also be a
great professional learning tool for pre-service teachers, allowing them to gage a sense of
students capabilities at and within different year levels and plan their future learning
experiences in accordance (Clarke, Roche & Mitchell, 2011). Furthermore, mathematics
interviews can be used as a formative assessment tool allowing teachers to make professional
judgements about student progress, achievement, needs and future planning/action,
providing them with face-to-face evidence of growth (AAMT, 2008, cited in (Reys, Lindquist,
Lambdin, Smith, Rodgers, Falle & Bennett, 2012; Clarke, Mitchell & Roche, 2005). Ultimately, it
is evident that mathematics interviews can provide a wealth of information regarding
students understanding of maths that can be used to inform the planning of future learning
opportunities.
Word count: 421 words

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.
Open tasks are said to promote engagement in mathematics learning by providing students
with the opportunity to reason, think systematically, make judgements and decisions,
generalise, communicate and problem solve (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2009, cited in
Varygiannes, 2014; Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013). Students are engaged in these tasks as
they are challenged to think outside of the box and are given control over the way they
approach them (Varygiannes, 2014; Middleton, 1995, cited in Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013).
This freedom of choice however, can be very daunting for students and result in
disengagement if not implemented effectively (Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013). Open tasks
have multiple answers, which provide teachers with insights into the range of understanding
and ability within the classroom (Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013). Open tasks provide an
avenue for teachers to gain an awareness of students current mathematical knowledge as
tasks can be approached at different entry levels and in different ways (Sullivan, Clarke &
Clarke, 2013). This emphasises one of the benefits of conducting open tasks, which is the fact
that they are more accessible for a range of students (Sullivan, 1999, cited in Sullivan, Clarke
& Clarke, 2013). Additionally, open tasks allow teachers to gain an understanding of students
current mathematical knowledge, as they are preferably content specific, addressing
mathematical topics that are present in the curriculum (Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013). Open
tasks also provide teachers with opportunity to assess mathematical knowledge directly
through discussion and observation, allowing them to provide extending and enabling
prompts to students who need to be challenged or assisted (Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013).
Resisting the urge to reduce the demands of the task by instructing students is a challenge of
this style of mathematics instruction and learning (Sullivan, Clarke & Clarke, 2013). Open
tasks aim to assess students mathematical proficiencies and procedural understanding, as
well as their ability to identify and apply appropriate mathematical content to a task,
emphasizing that mathematical understanding and procedural skills are equally important
and both accessible through open tasks (CCSSI, 2010, cited in Varygiannes, 2014). The
observation of, and discussion from these tasks, cannot be used alone to effectively plan for
future lessons, emphasizing the need for complementing rubrics. Rubrics are a beneficial form

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

of formative assessment used to analyze student work so that teachers can plan for future
instruction (McGatha, & Darcy, 2010). Rubrics can be holistic, analytic, specific or generic
(McGatha, & Darcy, 2010; Jonsson & Svingby, 2007; Brookhart, 2013). Research indicates that
topic specific, analytic rubrics are preferred for classroom use as they focus on one criteria at
a time, produce more generalizable and dependable results and allow teachers to give
students partial credit for their attempts and effort (McGatha, & Darcy, 2010; Jonsson &
Svingby, 2007; Brookhart, 2013). Analytic, specific rubrics take more time to create and more
time to mark than holistic and generic rubrics, however, give a better indication of student
strengths and needs which can be used to plan future student learning opportunities
(Brookhart, 2013; Jonsson & Svingby, 2007). Additionally, the creation process of analytic,
specific rubrics help to focus teachers on what they want the students to learn and hence
improve instruction (Brookhart, 2013). Ultimately, open tasks with rubrics provide teachers
with a clear understanding of students current mathematical knowledge that can be used to
plan future learning opportunities.
Word count: 438 words

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

References

Brookhart, S. (2013). How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading.
Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

Clarke, D., Mitchell, A., & Roche, A. (2005). Student one-to-one assessment interviews in
mathematics : a powerful tool for teachers. In Mathematics: celebrating achievement,
100 years, 1906-2006: MAV's 42nd annual conference ... 2005. Retrieved from
http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/153081289?versionId=166833519

Clarke, D., Clarke, B., & Roche, A. (2011). Building teachers expertise in understanding,
assessing and developing childrens mathematical thinking:
the power of task-based, one-to-one assessment interviews. The International Journal
on Mathematics Education, 42(6-7), 901-913. Doi: 10.1007/s11858-011-0345-2.

Clarke, D., Roche, A., & Mitchell, A. (2011). One-To-One Student Interviews Provide Powerful
Insights and Clear Focus for the Teaching of Fractions in the Middle Years. In J. Way &
J. Bobis (Eds.), Fractions: Teaching for Understanding (pp. 23-41). Adelaide : Australian
Association of Mathematics Teachers. Retrieved from
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC
MQFjAAahUKEwjbkqzTq8jHAhXE5aYKHadRDH0&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aamt.e
du.au%2Fcontent%2Fdownload%2F19922%2F272983%2Ffile%2Ftdt_F_clarke1.pdf
&ei=q4beVZuRMcTLmwWno7HoBw&usg=AFQjCNEb3zlL-
5x3KTkNMf1WpdYt8uXRGQ&sig2=U1YvC1aSKDBlntsPNFzHrg

Jenkins, O. F. (2009). Developing teachers knowledge of students as learners of mathematics
through structured interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(2), 141-
154. Retrieved from
http://link.springer.com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/article/10.1007%2Fs10857-009-9129-
9#

Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and
educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144. Doi:
10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002

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

McDonough, A., Clarke, B., & Clarke, D. M. (2002). Understanding, assessing and developing
children's mathematical thinking: the power of a one-to-one interview for pre-service
teachers in providing insights into appropriate pedagogical practices. International
Journal of Educational Research, 37(2), 211-226. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0883035502
000617

McGatha, M. B., & Darcy, P. (2010). Rubrics At Play: Reflect and Discuss. Mathematics Teaching
in the Middle School, 15(6), 328-336. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.acu.edu.au/stable/41183033?seq=3#page_scan_tab_co
ntents

Reys, R. E., Lindquist, L. M., Lambdin, D. V., Smith, N. L., Rogers, A., Falle, J., Bennett, S. (2012).
Helping children learn mathematics (1st Australian ed.). Milton, Australia: John Wiley &
Sons.

Sullivan, P., Clarke, D., & Clarke, B. (2013). Teaching with Tasks for Effective Mathematics
Learning. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4614-4681-1


Varygiannes, D. (2014). The Impact of Open-Ended Tasks. Teaching Children Mathematics,
20(5), 277-280. Doi: 10.5951/teacchilmath.20.5.0277