C887 MA, Mathematics Education (5-9) Teacher Performance Assessment, catalog number EDUC 6753, is the six-CU culminating assessment of the middle grades mathematics education master's degree at WGU. The catalog scope is an original research-based curriculum unit evidencing design and implementation of a multi-week standards-based unit for grades 5 through 9. That band is the most consequential stretch in school mathematics, because it is where arithmetic becomes algebra, and a unit designed for it is judged on whether it respects that transition.
The grades 5 to 9 band is where mathematics changes character
Middle grades mathematics is not a smaller version of high school mathematics. It is the passage where numbers stop being quantities to compute with and start being objects to reason about. Proportional reasoning is the spine of that passage: ratio, rate, scaling, percentage and linearity are one idea seen from several angles, and students who hold it move into algebra comfortably while students who do not spend years imitating procedures. A unit in this band that touches proportional reasoning without treating it as a relationship rather than a calculation has missed the point a reviewer is looking for.
Two further transitions live in the same years. Fractions must become numbers rather than pairs of whole numbers, which is what allows rational expressions to make sense later. And generalisation must become normal: describing a pattern, then writing it as a rule, then reasoning about the rule itself. A curriculum unit that evidences design across this band is expected to show which of these transitions it serves and how.
The other feature of the band is human rather than mathematical. These are the years when students most commonly decide they are not mathematics people, and instructional decisions about error, participation and public correction carry unusual weight. A unit design that never mentions how mistakes will be handled in the classroom is missing a dimension that middle grades reviewers notice, because in these grades it affects learning as much as sequencing does.
Turning the rubric into a design plan
Everything about how this assessment is scored sits behind your Course of Study and appears nowhere in the public catalog. Read it first. A teacher performance assessment rubric runs long, and it is the count and wording of its aspects, rather than the number of lessons you intend to plan, that decides the shape of the finished document.
Each aspect is scored independently against a three-point scale, and a 2 in every aspect passes the task. There is no averaging, so the sections written under time pressure at the end carry the same weight as the unit plan that took six weeks. Building the schedule around that fact is the difference between one submission and three.
The word budget, worked. With twelve scored aspects and a document running near 7,000 words, reserve 350 for an overview and 300 for a closing frame, leaving 6,350 across twelve aspects, about 530 each. Rebalance toward the argued sections: research rationale and analysis of student learning deserve 800 each, drawn from the context section, which almost every candidate over-writes. Reviewers want enough context to evaluate your decisions and nothing more.
Design the formative assessment before the lessons. In middle grades mathematics this matters more than at any other level, because the misconceptions in this band are specific, well documented and completely invisible unless a task is built to surface them.
A structure that fits a middle grades mathematics unit
Task directions govern where they specify a shape. Where they do not, this arrangement keeps the transition the unit serves visible and places each scored aspect where a reviewer looks for it.
| Section | What belongs in it | How it gets scored |
|---|---|---|
| Context | The class, the prior arithmetic students actually hold, and known gaps | Scored for how design responds to it rather than for detail volume |
| Transition served | Which middle grades transition the unit advances: proportional reasoning, fractions as numbers, or generalisation | Shows deliberate placement in the progression and frames every later aspect |
| Standards and goals | Standards addressed with the mathematical understanding stated as understanding | Scored for alignment and for assessable goals |
| Research rationale | Middle grades mathematics research supporting the tasks and representations | Scored where research-based design is named |
| Assessment plan | Formative tasks designed to surface known misconceptions, plus a summative measure | Scored for diagnostic power, not only for coverage |
| Lesson sequence | Each lesson with its purpose, its representation, and the reasoning it adds | Scored for coherence; representation changes should be deliberate and explained |
| Classroom culture | How error, participation and discussion will be handled during the unit | Scored where environment is named and unusually important in this band |
| Analysis and reflection | What the data showed by student and group, and what you would change with reasons | Scored heavily and usually written last, which is why it returns most often |
Use multiple representations deliberately and say why. Moving between a table, a graph, a diagram and a symbolic rule is how proportional reasoning becomes visible, and a unit that stays in one representation cannot evidence that students understood the relationship rather than the procedure.
Evidence craft in a middle grades assessment
Reviewers want to see design reasoning, real implementation and honest analysis. Middle grades work has particularly good research to draw on, and using it well is the cheapest way to strengthen the rationale.
- Cite research specific to this band. The literature on proportional reasoning, fraction understanding and early algebra is deep and directly relevant, and it outranks general pedagogy citations.
- Name standards precisely and align them task by task rather than in a single declaration.
- Include the diagnostic tasks themselves so a reviewer can see that they would surface the misconception you claim to target.
- Report student data showing the spread, including students who did not reach the goal, and say what you did about them during the unit.
- Anonymise all student references, including work samples and quoted explanations.
- Keep your own mathematics exact, particularly around ratio language, where imprecise phrasing is common and costly in this band.
- Quote sparingly, since standards documents are heavily reproduced and WGU runs submissions through a similarity check.
The reflections that read as genuinely professional trace one student's thinking across the unit. Following a single anonymised student from an initial misconception through a task that surfaced it to a later piece of work shows implementation more convincingly than any summary statistic.
What separates Competent from a return
Work is recorded as Competent or Not Competent, with no letter grades and no ordinary grade point average. Each aspect is judged alone, so returns identify particular sections rather than the whole submission.
- Every scored aspect has a heading in the rubric's own words.
- Every lesson states its purpose and the representation it uses.
- Every formative task is capable of revealing a specific misconception.
- Every differentiation decision names the gap it addresses.
- Every claim about learning is backed by data included in the document.
- Every reflection point pairs a change with the evidence that prompted it.
Performance assessment work can be revised and resubmitted with no grade penalty, so a return usually means rewriting rather than reteaching. What it costs is the six-month flat-rate term, and a culminating assessment that returns repeatedly is the most common reason a final term becomes two.
Our boundary does not move. We support design, structure and writing to each scored aspect. We do not teach your lessons, generate student work, invent data or write about students we have never met. Proctored assessments elsewhere on your plan remain yours to sit, and we never ask for portal credentials.
Six mistakes candidates make in C887
- Teaching proportional reasoning as cross multiplication. The procedure works and teaches nothing about the relationship, and rubrics asking for conceptual design are written to catch it.
- Staying in one representation. The understanding in this band lives in the movement between table, graph, diagram and rule.
- Using formative assessment that cannot diagnose. A task everyone answers correctly reveals nothing, and the analysis section then has nothing to analyse.
- Ignoring classroom culture. In grades 5 to 9 how errors are handled affects learning measurably, and a design silent on it is incomplete.
- Over-writing the context section. It is the easiest section to write and the least scored, and its length comes out of the sections that matter.
- Leaving the analysis to the last week. It carries full weight and is where rushed submissions reliably lose an aspect.
How support works on this course
Send your Course of Study for C887 with the rubric and the task directions. What comes back is a transition check that names which middle grades passage your unit actually serves, diagnostic tasks reviewed for whether they would surface the misconceptions you are targeting, a research rationale drawn from middle grades mathematics literature, and an aspect-mapped document plan that keeps word budget for analysis and reflection.
The classroom work stays yours. What we provide is scrutiny of the design before you teach it, which on a six-CU culminating assessment is where the time is genuinely saved rather than at the writing stage afterwards.
Questions candidates ask about C887
Is C887 the same course as EDUC 6753?
Why does the grades 5 to 9 band matter so much?
Can you build the unit or produce student results?
Middle grades unit not surfacing student thinking?
Send your Course of Study and rubric. You get a transition check, a diagnostic review of your formative tasks, a band-specific research rationale, and an aspect-mapped plan.
Where C887 sits in WGU's programs
The July 2026 catalog places this code in 1 current WGU program. Open a program page for the complete standard path and term positions. The live Degree Plan remains authoritative after transfer credit, substitutions, and mentor planning.
The assessments, one by one
The public catalog does not publish this course's PA/OA identity or task count. WGU Tutors publishes at most one PA manual per course and only from a WGU-controlled public rubric. Until that source exists, PA help begins from the student's real Course of Study and OA support remains preparation only.