Kate Frost Knauth & Salmon

May 30, 2014 EPS 541

Learning Progressions

Learning progressions provide context for student knowledge, demonstrating what knowledge a
student may already have, as well as appropriate next steps for this student. LPs provide structure for
formative assessments, the results of which allow teachers to consistently track a students progression
over time. By assessing a students understanding of a given topic prior to beginning instruction, a teacher
is able to use the assessment results to analyze where along the learning progression this child may be. By
locating a students current knowledge on the learning progression, a teacher is able to contextualize
student understanding and expose gaps in student knowledge. These gaps in student knowledge provide
structure around next steps for instruction. With the intense focus on standards and student output on
standardized tests, the pathway needed to get there can be forgotten. If a teacher does not understand the
"paths by which learning might proceed," she is less able to help students acquire the necessary
foundational skills they need to move forward and reach or accomplish these standards (Sztjatn, p. 147).
Heritage (2008) describes this lack of focus on the continuum of student learning, adding that most
existing standards [instead] describe what students should learn, by a certain grade level (p. 2). In
creating and utilizing LPs, a teacher moves away from student knowledge being viewed and judged in
isolation and reduced to either reaching or not reaching the given goal; instead, it becomes informative
data to help a student grow.
Learning progressions articulate increasingly sophisticated understanding of a given topic. They
demonstrate a typical progression of comprehension, from a basic level to a more complex, nuanced
understanding of the topic at hand. A single learning progressions looks at ones knowledge on a variety
of subtopics, which together form a deep understanding of the broader topic. These subtopics are referred
to as progress variables, the idea of which involves the recognition that learning anything significant
almost certainly involves growth along multiple interaction paths, some of them within the particular
content or subject being singled out to be learned, but some cutting across domains (Mosher (2011), p.
10). The learning progression that I created (see Figure 1.1. below) dove into an individuals
understanding of the Associative Property. As I note on my Framing Graphic, [The Associate Property]
is an important foundational concept concerning number sense. By understanding what it truly means to
add or multiply two numbers, students will understand why [the] flexibility- in the order of performing
[the given operation]- within an expression holds true. By understanding the associative property,
students will be able to logically reason more effectively even outside the field of mathematics. My
progress variables are contained within the field of study- mathematics, but include both computational
understanding as well as more conceptual understanding that allows for application to real world
problems. In thinking about a learning progression within the field of mathematics, it is important to
recognize that math is not just a functional skill; it is also a way of understanding and communicating
about the world (Coyne et al. (2011), p. 148).

Figure 1.1.

Novice:
Students understand how to
compute basic addition and
multiplication problems (with at
least three operands).

Intermediate:
Students understand that the
order in which operations are
performed in a group of 3
numbers is insignificant, as long
as the order of the operands is
not changed.
Students are able to explain
(through visual model or
otherwise why the associative
property is true).
Students understand why
subtraction and division are not
associative and are able to
explain this idea using
counterexamples.

Expert:
Students are able explain, using
words and real world examples,
the logic behind the associative
property. Students are able to use
this concept to solve real world
problems and better understand
real world situations.

Students are able to add and
multiply single and double digit
numbers. Students understand
what it means to add and
multiply numbers (5 + 7 means 5
more than 7 ; 5 x 7 means 5
Students understand that 5 + 7 +
8 can be solved: (5 + 7) + 8 or 5
+ (7 + 8) and that 5 x 7 x 8 can
we solved: (5 x 7) x 8 or 5 x (7
x8).

Students are able to use the
associative property to solve real
world problems.
Students are able to create word
problems that involve the
groups of 7).
Students can articulate 'a + b' as
'b more than a'

associative property.
Students are able to use their
knowledge of the associative
property to logically reason about
concepts outside of the field of
mathematics.

As students move from novice to expert in their understanding of the associative property,
students abilities involving computation increase, as does their understanding of the conceptual
knowledge of multiplication and addition. Students are also expected to build their metacognitive
practices, increasing their awareness of both their own understanding as well as their gaps in knowledge.
Students computational abilities do not proceed far beyond the ability to add or multiply, even at the
expert level. Instead, students understandings about the meaning of those operations, as well as how they
relate to one another becomes more robust. While application to the real world is not something that is
reserved for the expert level of understanding, the complexity of application and the expectation that a
student is able to draw such connections him/herself is reserved for an expert understanding. That is to
say that while students at the novice level may be aware that 2 + 7 can be seen as having $2 and gaining
or earning $7 more, at the expert level, students are able to see the associative property reflected in a
person having $2, earning $7, and then earning $5 or having $7, then earning $5, then $2 more, and in
either case ending with the same amount of money. Thus, both examples reflect real world application,
but as the complexity in the conceptual knowledge of the mathematics increases, so does the way in
which it is applied to a real world setting. Additionally, at the expert level, students are expected to know
when and how to apply this concept to a real world (word) problem, whereas at the novice level, such
application is often only used to help students begin to conceptualize the meaning of addition and
multiplication.
A learning progression is only useful insofar as someone (either a teacher or student) uses it to
understand where a students understanding is in comparison to a learning goal, and by doing so
formulates next steps to begin to fill in those gaps. Thus, it is vital that whoever is using this learning
progression (here we will assume it is a teacher) is aware of what concrete evidence (s)he is looking for
within each level (as well as potential sublevels that may exist more informally). Assessments must be
made in order to elicit such evidence of understanding from students. In terms of the learning progression
that I have created, such evidence in the novice level will look very different than that at the expert level.
At the novice level, students are expected to have a strong computational ability (of addition and
multiplication, although computational ability of subtraction and division will also be tested, and must be
strong by the intermediate level). As students progress, evidence of relevant knowledge shifts from
computation to the ability to explain ones reasoning and demonstrate conceptual knowledge by
constructing arguments and providing counterexamples. Additionally, as students progress along this
continuum they will be expected to reflect on their own understanding, an element of ability which will
also be assessed. Thus, while the broad topic of the assessment remains constant, the type of information
and the nuances of understanding of the progress variables being assessed change.
I would argue that the two most important aspects of a learning progression are creating a
comprehensive and logical learning progression (based in reliable research), and effectively using this
resource to create formative assessments. The learning progression itself, as described above, examines
the defining concepts and essential details of various progress variables, while the assessments
monitor students progress. One must be regularly assessing her students in order to continue to provide
relevant and effective instruction. Regular assessment lends itself to regular feedback. When students are
regularly receiving feedback about their progress, they are more likely to take ownership of their learning,
leading to increased motivation. It is important that teachers understand the relationship between learning
progressions and formative assessment, so that they are able to best help their students. One example of
effective practice in regard to formative assessments is setting and sharing learning goals (Szjatn, p.
151). Learning progressions provide clarity and structure in terms of goal setting by mapping out a
typical students trajectory and thus showing next steps for any given student. Learning trajectories (or
progressions) help teachers probe around more targeted concepts to understand the ways in which
students' cognitive processes align with the trajectory by providing a framework for understanding the
logic of the learner (Szjatn, p. 152). That is to say that learning progressions allow teachers to respond to
student work with a more nuanced understanding of the logic surrounding such output. Learning
progressions by no means provide an absolute trajectory for a student, but they provide a teacher will a
framework from which to work. In creating formative assessments, a teacher must be cognizant of
targeting all progress variables, in order to elicit a holistic picture of her students understanding of the
topic at hand.
Learning progressions provide a framework for goal setting, feedback, appropriate instruction,
and formative assessments. Placing a students skills along a continuum allows a teacher to logically
assess effective next steps for a student to take in order to reach a desired goal (which can also be
pinpointed along this trajectory). By [distinguishing] the logic of the learner from the logic of the
discipline, learning progressions provide teachers with greater insight into the thought processes of
students, which in turn allows a teacher to more accurately meet a student where (s)he is (Szjatn, p. 147).
In thinking about using learning progressions in my classroom next year, the first step will be figuring out
how I can create learning progressions for the many strands of content that I will cover throughout the
year. It is likely that prior to a new unit, I will create the relevant learning progressions, from which I will
then construct various formative assessments, including a pretest, for my students. One area in which I
need to continue to grow in order to utilize these resources to their full potential is in my small group
work and differentiation. I feel confident in my ability to use class data to drive my instruction, but need
to continue to work on implementing small group lessons in my classroom. Having yet to see it modeled,
I will also need to teach myself effective practices surrounding goal setting with students. Thus, despite a
comprehensive understanding of learning progressions as isolated objects, having never used them in a
classroom setting, I will need to continue to perfect my practice as it relates to this new resource.





Bibliography

Coyne, Michael D., Edward J. Kame'enui, and Douglas W. Carnine. Effective Teaching Strategies That
Accommodate Diverse Learners. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2011. Print.

Heritage, Margaret. "Learning Progressions: Supporting Instruction and Formative Assessment." Council
of Chief State School Officers (2008): 1-31. Web.

Mosher, Frederic A. "The Role of Learning Progressions in Standards-Based Education REform." CPRE
Policy Briefs RB.52 (2011): 1-16. Web.

Sztajn, P., J. Confrey, P. H. Wilson, and C. Edgington. "Learning Trajectory Based Instruction: Toward a
Theory of Teaching." Educational Researcher 41.5 (2012): 147-56. Web.