1. Erin Robbins
NELA Evaluation Plan
Stovall-Shaw Elementary School: Grade 5 Math Stations
Internship Project Objectives
Objective A. Teacher instructional practices consistently include the Math Stations component of Guided Math
Objective B. Positive changes in mathematical practices for students engaged in the use of Math Stations
Objective C. Teacher use of math stations as an RtI tiered intervention for students identified ‘at-risk’ in Mathematics
Objective D. Teacher interprets formative data to inform individual student conferring and measure student progress
Internship Project Strategies
Strategy 1: PI will support the teacher through training & collaborative planning sessions on the implementation of Math Stations.
Strategy 2: Teacher & PI will develop Math Stations for identified students to engage in during Math Workshop.
Strategy 3: Teacher will incorporate the use of Math Stations when designing math lessons.
Activities:
 Facilitates training sessions for teacher on Math Stations to focus on strategies of successful implementation.
 Collaboratively plan with teacher to identify areas of improvement in the implementation process and to develop math stations
for students based on curricular areas of need.
 Monitor teacher use of Math Stations to ensure they are being implemented weekly.
Evaluation Questions Measures/Data Sources Results
What do you need to know? How will you find out? What were the results?
Strategy 1a
How many training sessions were held Training Minutes
provide effective strategies on
implementation? (Quantitative)
To what degree did the teacher find useful Teacher Interview & Survey
the training sessions? (Qualitative)
Strategy 1b
How many collaborative planning sessions
were held throughout the implementation Planning Minutes
of the Math Stations? (Quantitative)
To what degree did the teacher find useful Teacher Interview & Survey,
the collaborative planning sessions? Teacher Weekly Reflection
(Qualitative) Log
1

2. Erin Robbins
Strategy 2
How many math station activities were Math Station Index
developed per Common Core priority
standard? (Quantitative)
To what extent did the Teacher find these Teacher Interview & Survey,
stations manageable to create, maintain, Teacher Weekly Reflection
and alter as necessary? (Qualitative) Log
Strategy 3
On average, how often and for how long did Math Station Weekly Log
students spend working with Math Station
activities each week? (Quantitative)
To what extent did the teacher consistently Classroom Schedule & Teacher
implement her schedule for the use of Weekly Reflection Log
Math Stations in her instruction?
(Quantitative)
Objective A
To what extent did the teacher consistently Classroom Schedule & Teacher
implement her schedule for the use of Weekly Reflection Log
Math Stations in her instruction?
(Quantitative)
Teacher Weekly Reflection
What did the teacher find challenging and Log & Teacher Interview &
manageable in implementing the use of Survey
Math Stations in her instruction?
(Qualitative)
Objective B
What did the students like best and like Student Weekly Reflection
least about the math station activities? Log, Post-program Open-
(Qualitative) Ended Survey Questions &
Focus Group
What percentage of students ‘agreed’ or Post-program Survey
‘strongly agreed’ that the Math Station
activities were helping them become better
mathematicians? (Quantitative)
2

3. Erin Robbins
Objective C
To what extent did the teacher use Math PEP Index of Math
Station Activities as an RtI intervention as Interventions
part of the Personal Education Plan
(PEP) process for at-risk students?
(Quantitative)
Objective D
To what extent did the teacher find useful Weekly Conferring Sheets,
the information gained from her students’ Rubric of Student Problem-
work in Math Station activities as a means Solving Behaviors, Teacher
of assessing progress and identifying points Weekly Reflection Log,
to confer with students upon? (Qualitative) Teacher Interview & Survey
Decisions (Guiding Questions: What do the results mean? What are you going to do now?)
Summary of Results (Interpretation of Data):
Next Steps (Action Steps):
Internship Project Outcomes:
Outcome I: Creation of an exemplar math classroom for teachers to see Math Stations used effectively during math instruction.
Outcome II: Increased proficiency for students on formative assessments in math given by the classroom teacher.
Outcome III: Increased proficiency in student display of problem-solving behaviors.
Evaluation Questions Measures/Data Sources Results
What do you need to know? How will you find out? What were the results?
Outcome I
To what extent does the teacher display Principal Intern Observation
proficiency in the use of Math Stations? Notes, Teacher Weekly
(Qualitative) Reflection Log
3

4. Erin Robbins
Teacher Interview & Survey
To what extent does the teacher feel
prepared to open her classroom during her
math instruction for peer observation of
the math station workshop model?
(Qualitative)
Outcome II
What percentage increase did the students Student Grades on Various
achieve over the course of the math station Formative Assessments, Pre &
implementation? (Quantitative) Post Assessment Scores
Outcome III
What percentage of students scored Rubric of Student Problem-
proficient or above proficient in the Solving Behaviors
identified problem-solving behaviors?
(Quantitative)
Decisions (Guiding Questions: What do the results mean? What are you going to do now?)
Summary of Results (Interpretation of Data):
Next Steps (Action Steps):
4