USVI Public Records

Document text

University of the Virgin Islands School of Education Bachelor Education AY 2015-2016 Elementary Education Impact on Student Learning-Teacher Work Sample (TWS) ELM STT 2 STX 7 1-TEACHING CONTEXT SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 1-A School Community Characteristics Candidate displays a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of the community, district, school that may affect learning. 88.89% Candidate displays some knowledge of the characteristics of the community, district and school, that may affect learning. 11.11% Candidate displays minimal, irrelevant, or biased knowledge of the characteristics of the community, district and school. 1-B Classroom Characteristics Candidate displays a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of the classroom that may affect learning. 88.89% Candidate displays some knowledge of the characteristics of the classroom that may affect learning 11.11% Candidate displays minimal, irrelevant, or biased knowledge of the characteristics of the classroom. 1-C Student Characteristics Candidate displays general & specific understanding of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) that may affect learning. 88.89% Candidate displays general knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) that may affect learning. 11.11% Candidate displays minimal, stereotypical, or irrelevant knowledge of student differences (e.g. development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities). 2 1-D Instructional Implications Candidate provides specific implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, district, school, and classroom characteristics. 77.78% Candidate provides general implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, district, school, and classroom characteristics. 22.22% Candidate does not provide implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, district, school, and classroom characteristics OR provides inappropriate implications. 2-CURRICULUM GOALS AND CONTENT SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 2-A Unit Goals All of the learning objectives are explicitly aligned Common Core standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. 88.89% Most learning objectives are aligned with Common Core standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. Learning objectives are not aligned with Common Core standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. 11.11% 2-B Student Learning Outcomes All learning objectives are significant, challenging, varied, and reflect the big ideas. All objectives reflect several types or levels of learning. 77.78% Most learning objectives are significant, challenging, varied, and reflect the big ideas. Most objectives reflect several types or levels of learning. 11.11% Learning objectives are not significant, challenging, or varied. Objectives reflect only one type or level of learning. 11.11% 2-C Alignment The student learning outcomes (goals) align with Common Core Standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. 77.78% Some student learning outcomes (goals) are not aligned with the Common Core Standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. 11.11% The student learning outcomes (goals) are not aligned with the Common Core Standards or other standards used by the VI Department of Education. 11.11% 2-D Content Scope and Sequences All lessons within the unit are logically organized and appear to be useful in moving students toward achieving the The lessons within the unit have some logical organization and appear to be somewhat useful in moving students toward The lessons within the unit are not logically organized organization (e.g., sequenced). 3 learning goals. 77.78% achieving the learning goals. 11.11% 11.11% 2-E Appropriateness Most goals are appropriate for the development; pre- requisite knowledge, skills, experiences; and cultural background of student. 77.78% Some goals are appropriate for the development; prerequisite knowledge, skills, experiences; and cultural background of student. 11.11% Goals are not appropriate for the development; prerequisite knowledge, skills, experiences; and cultural background of student. 11.11% 3-ASSESSMENT PLAN SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 3-A Pre-, Formative, and Post Assessments The plan includes a pre-, formative, post-assessment and multiple assessment modes (including performance assessments, reports, projects, etc.) and assesses student performance throughout the instructional sequence that measures student growth for each learning goal. 77.78% The assessment plan includes a pre-, formative, post- and multiple modes but all are either pencil/paper based (i.e. they are not performance assessments) and/or do not require the integration of knowledge, skills and reasoning ability. 11.11% The assessment plan does not does not assess students before, during, and after instruction and only include one mode. 11.11% 3-B Alignment with Common Core Standards. The assessment method aligns with the Common Core Standards or other standards used by DOE. 77.78% Some assessment methods align with the Common Core Standards or other standards used by DOE. 11.11% Methods of assessment lack alignment with the Common Core Standards or other standards used by DOE. 11.11% 3-C Alignment with Level of Learning All items are aligned with various levels of thinking used by Bloom’s Taxonomy of the identified learning goal. Some items are aligned with various levels of thinking used by Bloom’s Taxonomy of the identified learning goal. Items are not aligned with various levels of thinking used by Bloom’s Taxonomy of the identified learning goal. 4 66.67% 22.22% 11.11% 3-D Performance Criterion Assessments appear to be valid; scoring procedures are explained; most items or prompts are clearly written; directions and procedures are clear to students. 77.78% Assessments appear to have some validity. Some scoring procedures are explained; some items or prompts are clearly written; some directions and procedures are clear to students. 11.11% Assessments are not valid; scoring procedures are absent or inaccurate; items or prompts are poorly written; directions and procedures are confusing to students. 11.11% 3-E Adaptations Based on Student Need Adaptations are made to assessments that are appropriate to meet the individual needs of most students. 88.89% Adaptations are made to assessments that are appropriate to meet the individual needs of some students. Adaptations are not made to assessments to meet the individual needs of students or these assessments are inappropriate. 11.11% 4-DESIGN FOR INSTRUCTION SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 4-A Contextual Information Lessons address contextual factors and student needs. 77.78% Lessons address some contextual factors and student needs. 11.11% Lessons do not address contextual factors and student needs. 11.11% 4-B Instructional Objectives Instructional objectives are clearly stated and descriptive of learning outcomes that are measurable, observable, and student oriented; includes condition, behavior and criterion. 77.78% Instructional objectives are clearly stated and descriptive of learning outcomes that are measurable, observable, and student oriented but does not include condition, behavior and criterion. 11.11% Instructional objectives are not clearly stated and descriptive of learning outcomes and are not measurable, observable, or student oriented; does not include condition, behavior and criterion. 11.11% 4-C Lesson introduction is directly related to Lesson introduction is directly related to the Lesson introduction is not related to the lesson, 5 Lesson Procedure *Lesson Introduction *Lesson Development *Closure the lesson, enhances student interest, and leads into the development of the lesson which is adequately and sequentially developed building from simple to complex with opportunities for guided and independent practice. Closure is evident and summarizes and solidifies the main points of the lesson. 55.56% lesson, enhances student interest, and leads into the development of the lesson which is adequately and sequentially developed building from simple to complex with little opportunities for guided and independent practice. Closure is evident and summarizes and solidifies the main points of the lesson. 33.33% and does not enhance student interest. It does not lead into the development of the lesson and is not adequately sequentially developed with any closure. 11.11% 4-D Instructional and Questioning Strategies Instructional and questioning strategies are appropriate for learning outcome. They are meaningful, varied, and differentiated and promote critical thinking and problem solving. 55.56% Some instructional and questioning strategies are appropriate for learning outcome. They are meaningful, varied, and differentiated and promote critical thinking and problem solving. 44.44% Instructional and questioning strategies are not appropriate for learning outcome. They are not meaningful, varied, and differentiated and do not promote critical thinking and problem solving 4-E Technology Candidate integrates appropriate technology that makes a significant contribution to teaching and learning OR provides a strong rationale for not using technology. 100% Candidate uses technology but it does not make a significant contribution to teaching and learning OR teacher provides limited rationale for not using technology. Technology is inappropriately used OR teacher does not use technology, and no (or inappropriate) rationale is provided. 4-F Material Varieties of materials that directly support learning objective are clearly listed and meet the needs of all Some materials that directly support learning objective are listed and meet the needs of some students. Materials does not support learning objective are not clearly listed. 6 students. 88.89% 11.11% 4-G Adaptations A variety of appropriate adaptations are identified to meet the individual needs of students. 77.78% Some adaptations are identified to meet the individual needs of students. 11.11% Adaptations are identified are not appropriate to meet the individual needs of students. 11.11% 5-INSTRUCTIONAL DECISION MAKING SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 5-A Modifications Based on Analysis of Student Learning Modifications of the instructional plan are related to contextual factors and an analysis of student learning. 77.78% Some modifications of the instructional plan are made to address individual student learning. Modifications are inappropriate or are missing. 22.22% 5-B Sound Professional Practice Instructional decisions reported are pedagogically sound (i.e., likely to lead to student learning). 77.78% Instructional decisions reported are mostly appropriate, but some decisions are not pedagogically sound. Instructional decisions reported are not pedagogically sound (i.e., not likely to lead to student learning). 22.22% 6-REPORT OF STUDENT LEARNING SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 6-A Whole Class Clarity and accuracy of Data and Summary Provides a clear summary of student learning supported by data. Summary is meaningful and appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data. 66.66% Some parts of the data are unclear. Summary is meaningful and some appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data. 22.22% Data is unclear. Summary is inaccurate or conclusions are missing or not supported by data. 11.11% Impact on Student Learning Adequate evidence is provided on who achieved and made progress toward the learning goal and/or Little evidence is provided on who achieved and made progress toward the learning No evidence is provided on who achieved and made progress toward the objectives. 7 each objective. 77.78% goals/objectives. 11.11% 11.11% 6-B Subgroup Clarity and accuracy of Data and Summary Provides a clear profile of student learning. Summary is meaningful and appropriate conclusions are supported by data. 77.78% Some parts of the profile are unclear. Summary is inaccurate or conclusions were missed and/or not supported by data. 11.11% Presentation is unclear. Summary is inaccurate or conclusions are missing or not supported by data. 11.11% Impact on Student Learning Adequate evidence is provided who achieved and made progress toward the objective. 77.78% Little evidence is provided on who achieved and made progress toward the objective. 11.11% No evidence is provided on who achieved and made progress toward the objective 11.11% 6.B Individual Students Clarity and accuracy of Data and Summary Adequate evidence is provided on the students’ achievement or progress toward the objective. 77.78% Little evidence is provided on the students’ achievements or progress toward objective. 22.22% Presentation is unclear. Summary is inaccurate or conclusions are missing or not supported by data. Impact on Student Learning Adequate evidence is provided on the students’ achievement or progress toward the objective. 77.78% Little evidence is provided on the students’ achievement or progress toward the objective. 11.11% No evidence is provided on the students’ achievement or progress toward the objective. 11.11% 6.C Implicatio ns for Future Teaching Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction and assessment and explains why these modifications would improve student learning. 77.78% Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction and assessment but offers no rationale for why these changes would improve student learning. Provides no ideas or inappropriate ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction and assessment. 11.11% 11.11% 7. Reflective Narrative Analysis Scoring Guide Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved 7-A Interpretation of Student Uses evidence to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” Provides evidence but no (or simplistic, superficial) reasons or hypotheses to support No evidence or reasons provided to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student 8 Learning section. Explores multiple hypotheses for why some students did not meet learning goals. 88.89% conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section. 11.11% Learning” section. 7-B Insights on Effective Instruction and Assessment Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities and assessments and provides plausible reasons (based on theory or research) for their success or lack thereof. 88.89% Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities or assessments and superficially explores reasons for their success or lack thereof (no use of theory or research). 11.11% Provides no rationale for why some activities or assessments were more successful than others. 7-C Alignment Among Goals, Instruction and Assessment Logically connects learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction. 88.89% Connects learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction, but misunderstandings or conceptual gaps are present. Does not connect learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction and/or the connections are irrelevant or inaccurate. 11.11% 7-D Implications for Future Teaching Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment and explains why these modifications would improve student learning. 77.78% Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment but offers no rationale for why these changes would improve student learning. 11.11% Provides no ideas or inappropriate ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment. 11.11% 7-E Implications for Professional Development Presents a small number of professional learning goals that clearly emerge from the insights and experiences described in this section. Describes specific steps to meet these goals. 44.44% Presents professional learning goals that are not strongly related to the insights and experiences described in this section and/or provide a vague plan for meeting the goals. 44.44% Provides no professional learning goals or goals that related to the insights and experiences described in this section. 11.11% 9 QUALITY OF PRESENTATION SCORING GUIDE Rating → Indicator ↓ Proficient Developing Unacceptable Unobserved Mechanics of Writing There are very few spelling, grammar, capitalization, punctuation, sentence structure, and all other mechanics of writing errors. 55.56% There are some spelling,grammar, capitalization, punctuation, sentence structure, and all other mechanics of writing errors. 33.33% There are several spelling, grammar, capitalization, punctuation, sentence structure, and all other mechanics of writing errors. 11.11% Organization Sections are well organized. Required information is clearly presented and easy to find. 66.67% Some sections are well organized. Some information presented is easy to find. 22.22% Few sections are well organized. Some information presented was difficult to find. 11.11% Diversity Descriptions related to diversity show respect, understanding issues of diversity, and high expectations. 77.78% Some descriptions related to diversity show respect and understanding issues of diversity. Some expectations are low. 11.11% Few descriptions related to diversity show respect, understanding issues of diversity, and high expectations. 11.11% Overall TWS Quality TWS reflects the typical professional thought and effort expected in a culminating teacher education assignment. 66.67% TWS has sections that should be revised and improved before serving as a culminating assignment. 44.44% TWS does not reflect the typical professional thought and effort expected in a culminating teacher education assignment. 11.11%