After attending the Constructed Response Summit last fall (which, by the way, I highly recommend!), I decided I wanted to try using exit tickets in my math class to see if they actually improved response writing and mathematical understanding. On the multi-track schedule, I teach 3 blocks of math each day, to each of our 4 tracks.
My first dilemma, right off the bat, was gathering pre/post data. I was using the first constructed response from our benchmark, but the question didn't lend itself to much of a response. My second problem was that I wanted to "compare" results... and possibly not do the exit tickets with one class. But I couldn't bring myself to not have a class write out their thoughts once a week... I felt that I was doing them a disservice. The other part of this was that with our four tracks, there is a significant academic difference between the track colors, so it's not like I was dealing with an official random sample.
But, back to my study. I have been inconsistent at best with working with the students on their responses in math. While I have provided some direct instruction, I have not given them enough individual feedback with where they are in their thinking. I am keeping many of their post-its, and I am able to see growth with some of the students.
I think if I were to do this again, I'd really have to iron out my pre/post data, and I'd also like to implement a stronger math vocabulary component. I think I could use both Jenn and Prudence's ideas.
Well, that's where I am for now... though I have a long way to go!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes, maybe you could have them construct a response based on a vocab word. What if they worked in groups of 4 with 4 vocab words and each writer had a different color pen (remember that PD Day?) and they could help one another create responses---less post it notes for you! :)
ReplyDeleteThen again, how can you research pre/post data? Maybe 4 vocab words before you teach a unit, and the same after you teach a unit???