Fraction Pacing in a Co-Taught Fourth Grade
Mr. Alvarez and Ms. Reed co-teach 26 fourth graders. Before a fractions unit, the pre-assessment shows 8 students can order fractions with unlike denominators, 12 can compare fractions with like denominators but not unlike denominators, and 6 cannot explain what the numerator and denominator represent. The district pacing guide allots five days before the unit test. Ms. Reed wants to follow the guide because the grade-level team gives a common assessment Friday. Mr. Alvarez wants to reteach for a week. Four students are English learners, including one who has interrupted formal schooling and reads below grade level. The class has 45 minutes of math daily; the co-teachers have 30 minutes of common planning twice a week. The principal has asked teams to use pre-assessment data but not to fall behind the scope and sequence.
1. Interpret the pre-assessment data and decide whether the class should follow the pacing guide as written. Justify your decision using evidence about prerequisites and test validity.
Read the worked answer
Following the guide exactly would produce a test that measures exposure rather than learning. Eighteen of 26 students lack a prerequisite: 12 can compare only like denominators, and 6 cannot explain the meaning of numerator and denominator. For those 18, ordering unlike denominators depends on understanding equivalent fractions and common units. The eight who are ready would be held back by a full reteach week, while the six who lack conceptual understanding would be rushed by five days of grade-level pacing. The better decision is a differentiated five-day sequence, not an either-or choice. Days 1–2 should build meaning of fractions and like-denominator comparison for the six, using fraction strips and oral explanations. Days 2–5 should move the 12 into unlike denominators with visual models and number lines. The eight ready students should work on ordering and justifying with benchmark fractions and error analysis. The common assessment can still occur Friday if it samples the essential standards and includes items at these levels.
2. Describe how the two teachers should group students and divide roles across the five days. Include at least two formative checks.
Read the worked answer
Use a three-group station rotation rather than fixed ability labels. Group A, the six students, works with Mr. Alvarez on fraction meaning: partitioning shapes, naming numerator and denominator, and comparing with the same denominator. Group B, the 12 students, works with Ms. Reed on comparing and ordering with unlike denominators using fraction strips and number lines. Group C, the eight ready students, works independently on a rich task: ordering fractions and justifying with benchmarks such as one-half, then checking a partner's reasoning. Groups should be flexible after the first formative check. On Day 2, a quick exit ticket asks students to shade a fraction and explain the denominator; any Group B student who cannot do it moves to Group A. On Day 4, a three-item comparison task with unlike denominators determines who needs reteaching before Friday. The teachers should use their common planning to review exit-ticket data and reassign students, not to plan separate lessons from scratch.
3. How should the co-teachers communicate their decision to the grade-level team and the principal while preserving common assessment expectations?
Read the worked answer
They should bring the pre-assessment data and a proposed common assessment blueprint, not a request to abandon the team. The message is: "We are teaching the same essential standards on the same timeline, but we are front-loading prerequisite support and extending students who are ready." They can show that the Friday assessment will include common items aligned to the priority standards, plus one diagnostic item on fraction meaning. If the team requires identical tests, they should ask to add a follow-up check the next week so students who needed reteaching have a chance to demonstrate learning. This is professional judgment within the scope and sequence, not a pacing violation. The principal's request for comparable data is met because the common items remain common. The co-teachers should document the adjustments and bring the results to the next team meeting so the decision is evaluated rather than defended.