WTS 1 and 2

Individualized Instruction in Math

Kimberly Eick
Saint Marys University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standards 1 & 2
EDUW 691
Caroline Hickethier
June 1, 2014

page 1 of 16

WTS 1 and 2

page 2 of 16

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard WTS 1: Teachers know the subject that they are teaching.
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the disciplines
she or he teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter
meaningful for pupils.
Knowledge. The teacher understands how students conceptual framework and their
misconceptions for an area of knowledge can influence their learning.
Dispositions. Teacher has enthusiasm for the discipline(s) he or she teaches and sees
connections to everyday life.
Performances. The teacher can evaluate teaching resources and curriculum materials for
their comprehensiveness, accuracy, and usefulness in representing particular ideas and concepts.

WTS 1 and 2

page 3 of 16

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard WTS 2: Teachers know how children grow.
The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and provides
instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.
Knowledge. The teacher understands that students physical, social, emotional, moral,
and cognitive development influence learning and knows how to address these factors when
making instructional decisions.
Dispositions. ( a)The teacher appreciates individual variation within each area of
development; show respects for the diverse talents of all learners, and is committed to help them
develop self-confidence and competence. (b) The teacher is disposed to use students strengths as
a basis for growth, and their errors as an opportunity for learning.
Performances. The teacher assess individual and group performances in order to design
instruction that meets learners current needs in each domain ( cognitive, social, emotional,
moral, and physical) and that leads to the next level of development.

Danielson Domains
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy
Component 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
Component 1c: Selecting Instructional Goals
Component 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning
Domain 3: Instruction
Component 3a: Communication Clearly and Accurately
Component 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques
Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
Component 3d: Providing Feedback to Students

WTS 1 and 2

page 4 of 16

Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

Pre-assessment
For Wisconsin Teaching Standards (WTS) 1 and 2 I want to focus on improving student
learning in my inclusive math class creating a math class that the students are able to take what
they learn and use it outside the classroom. I currently teach in a high school CD room. The ages
in this classroom range from 14 to 21. I am the case manager for twelve students. Of my twelve
students 5 are nonverbal, one is deaf and blind. Eleven out of the twelve have a diagnosis of
Autism, ADHD/ ADD, and one has a diagnosis of Asperger Syndrome. The gender makeup is 2
girls and 10 boys. Due to the disabilities in this classroom there are 4 paraprofessionals, 1
interpreter for sign language, and myself the classroom teacher.
Of the six nonverbal students only one is able to complete simple addition and
subtraction. The other 5 do not know how to write numbers, how to count, or how to match a
number to a picture showing that many objects. They have no concept of time, money, or other
day to day math skills.
The remaining six range in skills of on the upper side pre-algebra abilities to basic
addition and subtraction. Of these six two go to another special education teacher for math
where they are working on multiplication and division or about a 3rd to 4th grade level.
In my inclusive math class with the four verbal students I have one working on prealgebra. One of my students is working on simple addition and subtraction, telling time, simple
story problems, and working with money (counting, figuring change, and identifying coins). One

WTS 1 and 2

page 5 of 16

is working on Market Math (this was assigned by her previous math teacher as she did not
finish). Finally the last student is working on kindergarten/ first grade math.
Being a special education teacher you need to know all of the subjects that you are
teaching, as stated in WTS 1. I am not a math expert but I also continue to learn so if my student
who working on pre-algebra needs assistance we can research how to complete the problem, or
we can ask another adult in the room, or we can ask a peer helper that comes in once a day, and
we also have the option of consulting with the high school math teachers.
WTS 2 knowing the abilities of my students and their varied levels is crucial for this
class as well as the success of my students. There are times when a person looking at some of my
students might forget that physically they are 15 however cognitively they function at about a 4
to 6 year old. It has been that looks may be deceiving it is very true in every sense of the
phrase.
In looking at the Danielson Domain I choose all of the components to focus on in areas of
Instruction and Planning and Preparation. In this classroom setting there is always room for
improvement in instruction as well as planning and preparation. I always need to have a backup
plans in case of behavioral problems, social problems, medical concerns, as well as
environmental problems.

Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

The general education students are on the block schedule, which consists of three 90
minute classes, two 45 minute classes or a skinny, and a resource at the end of the day. My

WTS 1 and 2

page 6 of 16

classroom is very similar however we have four 45 minute classes, two 90 minute classes, and
resource at the end of the day. All of my students have math during one of the skinnies.
During my math class there are 10 of my 12 students in class. Due to the varying abilities
of my students receive individualized instruction. In the beginning, before I knew their levels we
did do a group activity but I learned quickly that the 5 I was working with only 1 understood the
concepts that we were working on. There is no large group instruction at this time. Occasionally
we will do a large group activity, however I have not had much success with the large group
math activities.
In looking at the data that was collected most of my students did not regress or progress
in the past year of instruction. This is concerning as well as understandable based on abilities and
disabilities. I was hoping that at least one student would show some progress. As the tests and
data shows most of my students have already plateaued and have remained constant for the last
2-4 years based on the WAA, classroom assignments, tests, quizzes, and progress monitoring.

Assessment of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

In completing this assessment I looked specifically at 3 students in varied instruction.
Below are the case studies on the students.
Case Study 1:
Joe is a freshman who had an IQ test completed when he was in 7th grade and he scored a
42. Joe was going out for math to another special education teacher. However due to behavioral
issues Joe was returned to my classroom for instruction in math in February. When Joe left the
other math class he was working on 2 and 3 column addition and subtraction with borrowing
and carrying. On his best days in class Joe was getting 5 out of 10 right.

WTS 1 and 2

page 7 of 16

When Joe returned to my classroom we looked at the work that he was completing and
determined that (a) it was too hard, (b) he did not have the basics down (for example 9+9=16),
(c) he did not understand that you start on the right and end on the left ( he was doing it
backwards), (d) he would for get to carry or borrow, (e) he does not like math, and (f) he does
not like the teacher.
We reassessed his work and started him at the second grade level. We had him work out
of the assigned book for one week. The text started off as a review of what was taught in first
grade. Joe was still at best scoring a 50%. The problems included addition, subtraction, counting,
filling in the missing number (58___, 60), and shapes.
We reevaluated a second time and determined that (a) he was not able to read the math
problems, (b) he did not understand the math problems, and (c) he still did not like math. We
then told him that we wanted to review what he knows and had him work out of a first grade
math book.
Joe continued to struggle with the reading portion but during the first week he was able to
increase his score to a 70%. We learned that Joe was still struggling with the reading portion,
understanding words (symmetry, hexagon), and counting (by 2, 5, and 10s). With each sheet that
Joe completed we would go over what he got wrong. He continues to improve his math scores.
Case Study 2:
Jane was added to my math class at the beginning of second semester, the end of January.
Jane is a junior who has the diagnosis of Autism. When she came to my math class the previous
teacher sent the work she had not finished the previous semester. She was working on Market
Math, which is where you are assigned to look up different items find the prices and add up the
total bill, and on some problems figure what the change would be.
When Jane started in my room we were grading her papers and she was scoring at best
20%. We changed her math for one day to the second grade level; she was unable to read the
problems and after they were read to her answer the problems. Jane does not ask for help and

WTS 1 and 2

page 8 of 16

will not re-do assignments when given the opportunity. We had her try the first grade level she
still struggles with the reading portion but she is increasing her math score to a 70%. She is
working on the same math as Joe. Joe has a lower IQ than Jane but he is doing better than Jane
on the math, partially because he is willing to ask for help and re-do assignments when given the
opportunity.
Case Study 3:
Jack is a sophomore who has math class with another special education teacher. He is
currently working on multiplication and division. Jack is unable to complete his math during
class and will ask for help during resource. Jack has struggled with this math class all year. This
class is taught as a large group with individual assignments for each student to complete. There is
a timed test for 12 minutes at the beginning of class. There are either 50 or 100 questions on the
times test. Jack is taking the multiplication test on 5s and 6s. He is able to complete 50-60
problems on average daily with the assistance of a multiplication chart.
What we have found with Jack is that he does not understand the concept of
multiplication and division. He does have a multiplication chart that he uses for all of his
problems. In his IEP it is stated that he can use a calculator, the other teacher prefers that he does
not use a calculator. He does not feel comfortable asking the teacher for help. We have decided
that next year Jack will be returning to my class for math instruction and that we will be taking
him back to the basics so that he has a good foundation to build off from. The other goal is that
Jack is able to increase his understanding of multiplication and division and is able to complete
the problems without the assistance of a calculator or number chart.

WTS 1 and 2

page 9 of 16

Assessment of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)

For Joe, Jane, and Jack math is a challenge. Joe and Jane have the hardest time focusing
and need almost silence to work in with an adult next to them coaching, assisting, and
encouraging them to try. Jack is willing to try and is able to focus best when he is able to listen to
music and work in a small group setting. He also works best with an adult sitting beside him
coaching, assisting, and encouraging him to try.
The learning environment is not always ideal due to behavioral concerns. It is also
nearly impossible to have a paraprofessional available everyday at the same time for each student
that needs the assistance.
Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research
The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment
assessment shows that to meet the student needs requires individualized instruction as well as
adult supports for the students to be successful. The assessment also shows that once the student
and correct level are place the students are more successful and more confident in their skills. It
is my job to make sure that the students are at the correct level.
Research Summary
As a High School Special Education teacher it is my job to make ensure that students are
prepared with life skills for after high school. I am also responsible for building on the basics that
they already have. I have learned in the first year of teaching in the CD classroom that I cannot
teach in a large group instruction I have to individualized the instruction. I have also found that
the more relevant to real life I can make the instruction the better that the students do.
It is estimated that between 4 and 7% of school-age population experience some form
of mathematics-focused disability. Little (2009) continues approximately of students
identified with learning disabilities were identified due underperformance in math. Those
students with the diagnosed math disability (2009) perform several grade levels below their

WTS 1 and 2

page 10 of 16

general education peers. My classroom would support Littles previous statement. Most of my
students perform at the kindergarten to second grade level and they are in high school.
The tools that are available to teachers in terms of apps for the i-Pad or instructional
websites have assisted in individualizing education. According to Akinsola and Awofala (2010)
advances in internet technology have shown that electronic personalization can be more
efficiently utilized in delivering individualized materials to a large population of students and
assessing students learning outcomes in mathematics. The tools that are available to teachers
find new sources and ideas for teaching the subject.
Another problem facing math teachers as well as the students is the amount of material in
the textbook. Comparing an Algebra textbook from 1904 to a 2004 Algebra textbook there is a
lot less material. In the 1904 textbook there were 23 units of study and in 2004 the text had 12
units of study. Vigdor called it watered down in 2013. He goes on to say that:
While the intent of equality-minded reforms is to boost low-performing
students, in the case of American mathematics achievement decline among higherperforming students has been part of the bargain the pursuit of equality can in fact
harm all students, not just those at the top.
Vigdor finishes his article with the following Not all children are equally prepared to
embark on a rigorous math curriculum on the first day of kindergarten, and there are no realistic
policy to change this simple fact. Rather than wish differences among our students away, a
rational policy for the 21St century will respond to those variations, tailoring lessons to childrens
needs.
Research Implications
The research question was to find the importance of individualized instruction in
math and how is benefits the students. The targeted learning objective was to have
students will demonstrate a mastery of addition and subtraction facts. The criteria that I
will be tracking are:

WTS 1 and 2

page 11 of 16

a. Students will complete timed tests daily with 90% accuracy.

b. Students will show growth in daily classroom assignments.
To date we have not met the above goal. I plan on incorporating the ideas that Little
presented in 2009. I will continue to work on this goal next year as one of my classroom goals is
to improve students mathematical abilities by one grade level. This will very hard to obtain due
to the variety of levels in the classroom. Even if only one student increases their abilities in math
it is a start to the grand plan of educators.
Research-based Action Plan
To start progress monitoring for the students in the Case Summarys the first step is to
assess the level that the student is at. Little (2009) suggests that once levels have been completed
differentiated instruction will be put into place. Differentiated instruction looks at who you are
teaching and what you are teaching. Metacognitive strategies and instructional routines refer to
how to think and what they are doing in learning (2009). Progress monitoring and formative
assessment procedures refers to how are you going to assess the students or collect your data.
Lastly computer assisted instruction and Universal Design for Learning (or UDL). UDL is too be
flexible and adaptable for the needs of the students. If I have any questions about Littles model
she does provide examples as well as different ideas for students with different needs or
accommodations.
Action Plan Summary Outline
1. Find accurate student levels by testing students when they return in the fall.
2. Monitor student progress towards goal daily.
Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
1. Standardized goal: Use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems
involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with
unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using objects, drawing, and equations with a symbol for the
unknown number to represent the problem.

WTS 1 and 2

page 12 of 16

2. Targeted learning objective: To increase students ability to complete basic math

questions with 90% accuracy in 4 out of 5 timed tests weekly.
Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Task: Students will demonstrate a mastery of addition and subtraction facts.
2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)
a. Students will complete timed tests daily with 90% accuracy.
b. Students will show growth in daily classroom assignments.
Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s):
1. Students will be assessed using informal monitoring.
2. Students will be assessed using daily timed math sheets.
3. Students will be assessed using completed daily assignments.
4. Students will take a test at the end of each quarter.
Post-assessments
Before the assessment was started students were not passing math. There were many
behaviors and one student was removed from a math class. The average grade of the 9 students
that I had prior to the start of this assessment was a 68%. With two students averaging a 20% on
weekly assignments and 15% on daily timed math sheets.
In the beginning of the assessment there were many complaints from the students
especially Joe in middle school he did not have to complete any assignments and he was passed.
They enjoyed the one-on-one attention however they did not like to work. As Jack put it time to
talk. Most of my students do not experience much positive adult interaction so this was also a
confidence booster for the students and it gave the paraprofessionals and myself a chance to get
to know the students better and build good strong relationships.
Now that this has been started the students know what to expect for math class next year.
They also have more confidence when it is time for math class. Grades have improved. The

WTS 1 and 2

page 13 of 16

timed sheets vary from day to day. On average Joes scores range from a 52% to 100% on his
timed math quiz. The problems change, the amount also change (day 1has 50 problems, day 2has
100 problems). Throughout the process 9+9=16, that has remained constant every time he has
that problem.
I hope to continue this process next year to see the academic growth in the students as
well as their faces when they get it, the light bulb affect. I would also like follow Littles model
and use her suggestions for assisting the students in understanding and learning math.
Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
This is the first year that I have taught in a public school. I taught two years in a
residential treatment facility. The standards and expectations are very different so this past year
has been a learning year for me. The classroom that I have this year has had four teachers in the
last three years so there has been little consistency which is important for student development.
Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
Since the research is not fully completed I am unable to share final results. The
preliminary results that I can share are not as positive as I had hoped. I am hoping with some
consistency that the results will improve over the course of next year.
What I can say is that there has been very little growth or change for Joe or Jane. Jack
has made some progress however in other areas he is regressing. According to data collected last
year Jack was able to complete addition, subtraction, and some multiplication without the use of
a chart. He did need a chart for division only. This year he has regressed to the level that he is
unable to complete multiplication without the use of a chart. For some subtraction he needs a
chart as well.
Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
In comparing the math class from the beginning of the school year to present there has
been many improvements. The greatest improvement in the math class is that the students are
being taught at their level. The class is individualized to meet the diverse needs of the students.
The learning environment while learning targeted objective was quieter with students more

WTS 1 and 2

page 14 of 16

engaged since they were working primarily one-on-one. Overall the students are more engaged,
participate more, ask for additional work, will help struggling peers, and appear more confident
of their skills.
Reflection of Entire Learning Process
The guiding question for this entry was to find the importance of individualized instruction
in math and how is benefits the students. I knew that for classroom management it was important
to meet the students where they are at. However I did not realize the full extent of the affects
teaching over the students had on their social, emotional, and physical health.
The saying an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is very accurate in the teaching
profession. By spending the extra time planning and preparing my math lessons have improved,
student participation has improved, and student behaviors have decreased the student when they
are in math class. I still make sure that I multiple plans in place and that I am prepared for any
possible situation that I can be.
What Worked and Why
1. Bringing Joe back to my classroom for math has benefitted him greatly. He is
receiving instruction at his level. He is getting the support he needs. He is not having the
behavioral issues that got him removed from his previous math class. It is normally a quieter
environment for him to work and remain focused.
2. Having technology in the classroom to encourage learning. By giving Joe and Jane
different options for how their work is given to them (either worksheet or computer or i-Pad) has
given them a voice in their education as well as helping them work on their self advocacy.
What Did Not Work and Why
1. Trying to talk with the other teacher about Jacks math and asking her change or
modify the format that he receives his instruction in did not go well. She is a teacher with 30+
years experience and this is how she has always taught and she was not changing. Whereas I am
a third year teacher will little experience compared to her.

WTS 1 and 2

page 15 of 16

2. Using technology to teach math. I have caught Joe and Jane not working on assigned
math tasks but rather playing games or attempting to go on facebook and YouTube. They also
prefer to go on the computer rather than completing assigned worksheets.
My Next Steps
1. Incorporate a better balance of technology and paper.
2. Have Jack returned to my class for instruction in math.
3. Compile a chart for the students so they can also monitor progress.

References
Akinsola, M. K., & Awofala, A. O. Effect of personalization of instruction on students
achievement and self-efficacy in mathematics word problems. International Journal of
Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40 , 389-404 .
Little, M. E. Teaching Mathematics: Issues and Solutions. TEACHING Exceptional Children
Plus, 6, 1-15 .
Vigdor, J. Solving America's Math Problem. Education Next, 13, 9 pgs .

WTS 1 and 2

page 16 of 16

Artifact
This research is still in progress with new materials being added in the fall. Currently I
use a chart that looks like:
Name
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Joe
5/29
X
X
Jane
5/29
X
X
X
X
When a student gets a problem wrong an x goes in the box so that we can track what
problems they are struggling with. We do review the problems at the end of class with the
student. Joe is usually able to tell us what he did wrong once we have read the math problem to
him. He typically gets number 6 and 7 wrong daily. Problem number 6 looks at symmetry and
shapes. Problem number 7 looks at reading a chart and either answering a question or writing a
number sentence.
Jane also struggles with 6 and 7. She also struggles with number 1 which is counting by
either 5s or 10s, and number 5 which is drawing shapes. Jane is not able to explain the correct
procedure after we go over the problem. If we give Jane the same problems the next day she will
still get them wrong.