1. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
Teaching all Learners
Fall and Spring,

2. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
By October 19
Work with a peer to administer the assessment to:
A class of students, including students with disabilities – if they can take the test as a group OR
10 students, including students with disabilities
– if they need to take the assessment individually
Fill out the data sheet with your results

3. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
October 19
Bring completed data sheet and student work to class
You will begin to analyze your data

4. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
November 16
Turn in your
Data sheet for the data collection you did in October
Description of patterns of performance, including van Heile levels of students
Comparison of the performance of students with and without disabilities in your group
Instructional implications of your data

5. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
Between November 19 and March 29
Keep a log about instruction you provided relative to students’ understanding of polygons, specifically triangle, and your reflections on this instruction
Re-administer the assessment
Examine your data and note
Change from fall data
Comparisons of performance of students with and without disabilities

6. Tricky Triangles Assessment Project
March 29
Turn in
Final data along with initial data
Log of instruction and reflections
Write-up
Changes shown in the data in comparison to fall data
Comparisons of performance of students with and without disabilities
Be prepared to present and discuss your data

7. Tricky Triangle Assessment Project
If you do the assignment with a peer in the class
You can both contribute to and hand in one set of data and interpretations
The only separate component:
Instructional log and reflections on the instruction

8. Grading Criteria Date Due We will look for 10-19 (Home-work)
Completed data sheet and student work
Evidence of careful assessment and recording; Van Hiele levels noted
11-16
(40%)
Completed data sheet, write-up of patterns, differences between students with and without disabilities and instructional implications
Complete; correspondence between data and interpretation; instructional implications that correspond to data; evidence of considering differentiation
3-29
(60%)
Completed post-test and pre-test data sheet, log of instructions and reflections, write-up of change and differences between students with and without disabilities
Complete; evidence of teaching linked to students’ levels; evidence of thinking carefully about instruction and its impact on students; correspondence between data and interpretation