Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Successful teacher candidates support learning by designing a Unit Work Sample that employs a range of
strategies and builds on each students strengths, needs and prior experiences. Through this performance
assessment, candidates provide credible evidence of their ability to facilitate learning by meeting the following
standards:
The candidate uses multiple assessment strategies and approaches aligned with learning goals to
assess student learning before, during and after instruction.
The candidate designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and
learning contexts.
The candidate uses regular and systematic evaluations of student learning to make instructional
decisions.
The candidate uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about
student progress and achievement.
The candidate reflects on his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching
practice.
The candidate will create a Unit Work Sample to demonstrate its impact on student learning. The attached
template, which consists of several components, should be used to fulfill this requirement. Attach samples of
student work as an appendix.
Revised 2015
Cooperating Teacher:
District:
OCSD5
Subject: Mathematics
Woods
Section II: Description of Students: Describe (1) the number of students, (2) demographics of the students, and (3)
any other special features or important information that you included in your Long Range Plan as you described your
students.
Description
(of your findings in terms of your students)
Female- 10
Male- 8
Percentile
< 25th
10
25th to 49th
6
50th to 74th
2
>74th
0
Mean Grade Equivalent: 4.9
*Table inserted at the bottom*
MAP Math
MAP Reading
MAP Language Usage
Ethnicity
Visual- 60%
Auditory- 15%
Tactile- 20%
Visual/Auditory- 5%
Visual/Tactile- 0%
Evenly Distributed- 0%
Description of Students: 2nd Block
Factors
(e.g. gender, SES, reading levels, disabilities, ethnicity,
student interest, and other relevant factors, etc.)
Description
(of your findings in terms of your students)
Gender
Female- 8
Male- 12
MAP Math
Revised 2015
MAP Reading
Language Usage
MAP
Percentile
< 25th
10
25th to 49th
5
50th to 74th
4
>74th
0
Mean Grade Equivalent: 4.5
*Table Inserted at the bottom*
Ethnicity
Section III:
Contextual Factors: Describe the contextual factors, including the (1) relevant
student characteristics from Section II, as well (2) as other factors related to the community,
district, school, classroom or students, that are likely to impact instruction and/or student
learning with regard to the selected instructional unit. Include a (3) description of the ways in
which each of these factors will be taken into consideration during unit planning and
instruction.
In my first block mathematics class, I have eight males and 10 females. In my second
block mathematics class, I have eleven males and nine females. In total, there are 16 African
American females, one Caucasian female, one biracial female, 17 African American males, and
three Hispanic males. This information came from my classroom observations as well as a class
roster. The average reading level for the two eighth grade classes is 4.9. This information came
from the 2016-2017 STAR scores. In my first block class I have three students with IEPs. I was
not told any specific disabilities but two of the students are to be given extra time if needed,
oral reading, use of a calculator, and given a small group setting. The other student is an
English Language Learner. His oral skills are better than his writing skills. He also needs oral
reading, a small group setting, and provided the use of a calculator. In my second block class,
one of my students has a vision impairment where he needs to be seated at the front of the
classroom and the worksheets or notes to be given to him in a bigger text size. The other three
in my second block class are to be given extra time if needed, oral reading, use of a calculator,
and given a small group setting. This information came from my cooperating teacher as she
was provided the information from the resource teacher.
The males interests are mostly in sports (specifically basketball and football) band,
playing video games, and reading. The females interests are reading, shopping/fashion, and
sports (specifically cheerleading, band, volleyball, and basketball). This information came from
my observation and the school activities the students are involved in.
A major factor that is likely to impact instruction and/or student learning is the students
live in a rural community and they may not have the base knowledge needed for understanding
and relating to the real world application of mathematics. All of the students are provided with
a laptop to take home and to use while at school. Many of them do not have internet access at
home.
Revised 2015
During unit planning and instruction, I will try to use analogies and situations that I feel
will allow students to relate to the mathematical concepts that will be presented. Because
Correlated
Standards/Expectations
Unit Objectives
Content or Cognate 1
Mathematics
8.GM.6 Use models to demonstrate a
proof of the Pythagorean Theorem
and its converse.
The students will apply the
Pythagorean Theorem to compute
the missing measurement of a right
triangle.
Objective 1:
Objective 2:
Unit Title:
Length:
Revised 2015
Timeline
October 28, 2016 October 31,
2016
Unit Objective
Number(s)
1
1, 2
Reflect on the instructional plans for the units: How does this instructional plan (1) establish a balance between grade-level
academic standards and expectations and the needs, abilities and developmental levels of individual students? (2) Discuss
the strategies used to teach students on varying levels. (3) Discuss how you designed your instructional plan using students
characteristics, needs and learning contexts.
The instructional plan establishes a balance between grade-level academic standards and expectations and the
needs, abilities and developmental levels of individual students by aligning to the state standards. Instruction is adjusted for
individual needs based on my knowledge of student abilities. The balance is created so that instruction is delivered in the
best way for students, yet still allows mastery of academic standards. From observing my teacher, she does a great job of
varying the level of instruction to suit the learners. Although, in the beginning of my student teaching I was not varying the
level of instruction, now I am.
For students with varying levels, I like to use cooperative learning groups, extra time on assignments, calculator
usage, or giving step-by-step instructions. I also check for understanding with questions using a biased method where
students are chosen at random (pulling sticks). This allows me to see which students are grasping the concept and those
who I need to remind them or revisit that specific topic.
When designing lesson plans, I consider my students depth of knowledge, ability to comprehend and make
connections across the curriculum, and the students interest. I also try to relate to the students so they will retain the
information better. For an example, during the review I had the students jumping rope and balancing on one foot because I
know my students are athletic and are interested in competing.
Type of Assessment
(Check one for each assessment)
Teacher-Made
Commercially
(A copy of each teacher
Available
Revised 2015
Reflect on the unit assessments: (1) How did you determine that your unit assessments are valid and reliable for all
students? (2) How did you use your prior understanding of students skills to plan your instruction?
The questions serve as an anticipatory set to get the students mind thinking about the lesson for the day. The Pre and Post
Test was created by Ms. Woods and myself. We pulled eight key terms from the unit and four examples; two of which they
were given a picture of a triangle and had to solve for the missing side using the Pythagorean Theorem and two real world
application examples where they had to draw a picture and then solve for the missing side using the Pythagorean Theorem.
This was valid for all students because it covered the objectives they would be learning during the unit. The Quiz was given
about 5 days after being introduced to the Pythagorean Theorem. This allowed me to see how the students were progressing
and served as a way for me to see where the students were making mistakes so I could cover it during the lesson. The
Common Assessment was created by Ms. Woods through the Mastery Connect Software. The software checks the
assessment to make sure all the standards that need to be covered are included on the test.
Section V B: Other Assessments (1) Describe and attach the assessments for each unit objective. (2) Include
descriptions of any necessary accommodations. For each assessment, (3) include the evaluation criteria (i.e., describe
and/or attach each appropriate scoring rubric, observation checklists, rating scales, item weights and the like). (4)
Attachments must be clearly labeled to indicate their relationship to the elements in the table below.
Assessments
Content/Cognate 1
Unit Objective 1:
Pre-Assessment(s)
Pre Test
Formative Assessment(s)
Quiz
Activity (Verifying)
Group Activity (Team Pair Solo)
Summative Assessment(s)
Common Assessment #3
Revised 2015
Accommodations
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
-Copy of Notes where applicable
-Oral
Reading
of
Lesson
Materials/Assessments
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
-Copy of Notes where applicable
-Oral Reading of Lesson
Materials/Assessments
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
-Copy of Notes where applicable
-Oral
Reading
of
Lesson
Materials/Assessments
Evaluation Criteria
Each key term has a rating of 1-4.
1- Never heard the term
2- Ive seen or heard of the
term
3- I think I know the term
4- I know and can explain
the term.
The four examples are worth 10
points each. Two of which the
students had to solve for the
missing side and two real world
application problems. The score
was out of 72. Example: 72/72
being a 100.
-Quiz had 8 examples. Each
example was worth 12.5 points a
piece.
-Activity (Verifying) and Team Pair
Solo: These activities were
graded on completion, effort and
correctness.
CA #3- 20 Multiple Choice
questions. Each question was
worth 5 points a piece.
(Only one summative assessment
for the unit).
Formative Assessment(s)
Pythagorean Theorem Worksheet
Real World Application Worksheet
Gallery Walk
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
-Copy of Notes where applicable
-Oral
Reading
of
Lesson
Materials/Assessments
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
-Copy of Notes where applicable
-Oral
Reading
of
Lesson
Materials/Assessments
Summative Assessment(s)
Common Assessment #3
(CA#3)
-Oral reading
-Extra time to complete
assignments and assessments
-Calculator usage
-Small group instruction
Revised 2015
After administering the pre-assessment, I was able to see that the students did not have any prior
knowledge about the Pythagorean Theorem. I expected this because the Pythagorean Theorem is an eighth
grade standard. Pretests are important because not only do they give the teacher insight into students
background knowledge, it also gives the students an idea of what will be covered during the unit.
Revised 2015
100
80
80
Scores
60
40
99
90
85
81
97 95 93
90
85 82
85
80
75
75
70
65
55
49
40
28
20
25
25
24
35
31
35
30
30
17
11
70
70
60
56
24
90 90 89
85 86
10
11
12
39
26
13
18
14
20
15
16
28
17
18
Student
Pre Test
Post Test
CA #3
Chart Title
120
100
100 100
85
99
85 85
85
85
80
Score
80
85
38
21
20
31
26
75
71
58
Post Test
35
70
85 86
65
CA #3
49
30
30 28
32
60
80
55 53
10
29
25
18
94
39
33
19
17
15
15
83
65
64
90
85
75
Pre Test
40 36
89
70
60
100
95
12
011
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Student
The average score for the Pre-Test in first block was a 26, the average score for the Post-Test was an
81 and the average score for the Common Assessment #3 was a 77. The average score for the Pre-Test in
second block was a 26, the average score for the Post-Test was a 74, and the average score for the Common
Assessment #3 was a 73. In the first block, student 7 was absent on the day of the Pre Test. Student 2 and
student 18 were absent on the day of the Post Test and CA #3. In the second block, student 5, student 9, and
Revised 2015
student 19 were absent on the day of the Pre Test. Student 6 was absent on the day of the Post Test and
CA#3.
After comparing the students pre and post test scores, I observed 63% of students have mastered the
concept. Based on CA#3 85% of the students passed the test with a 60 or above. Out of the 85% that passed,
56% of the students mastered the concept scoring an 80 or above. Only two students in my first block class
failed the post test. In my second block 5 students failed the post test. When I graded their Post Test, I noticed
that the students who failed, refused to follow the procedures for using the Pythagorean Theorem Formula. (2 nd
block, student 7 consistently does not engage in instruction and often does not follow classroom procedures.
Therefore, it creates learning gaps affecting his grades. Student 12 was suspended for several days during the
unit which affected the amount of classroom instruction he received.)
After each class period I reflect on ways that I could improve the lesson or things that I should add for
the next day/lesson. In some cases, the students lack the willingness to apply themselves to engage in
instruction and in turn it greatly impacted their test score. Additionally, the students who were in and out of the
classroom because of behavioral/health issues also greatly impacted the test scores because they were
missing instruction. I offer tutoring during my planning period for those students who ask or I recognize may
need further instruction or one on one time.
The school policy states that students who do not score an 80% or above must retake the test.
Therefore, we will take one class period to review/reteach the Pythagorean Theorem and its application and
provide the students with a retest the following day. Thus, only the students who scored below an 80% would
retest.
Section VI: Analysis of Student Learning
Once you have completed the unit, analyze all of your assessments and determine your students progress relative to the unit
objectives. (1) Did the information increase your understanding of individual students performance?
After analyzing the data from the assessments, I can definitely say that I understand the students abilities and
I have a better understanding of my students performance. I was able to pinpoint the students misconceptions
and it allowed me to see what needs to be reemphasized during the review process and or possibly be
presented in a different way.
(2) Attach clearly labeled tables, graphs or charts that depict student performance (strengths and weaknesses) for the entire
class, for one selected subgroup and for at least two individual students.
See attachment at the end of the unit work sample.
(3) For each visual representation, (3) provide a descriptive narrative that summarizes your analysis of student progress and
achievement.
From the data provided, there was an 85% passing rate for the entire 8 th grade on the Common Assessment #3. There
were 34 students who tested and of those 34 students, 29 passed with a 60% or higher. Of the 34 students who took the
Common Assessment 19 scored mastery (56% scored mastery). Mastery is an 80% or higher.
For the selected subgroup, I provided data for the first period of 8 th graders. There is a 87.5% passing rate for the
Common Assessment #3. In the first period, I have a total of 18 students. Only 16 students tested and 14 of those students
passed making a 60 or higher. The two students who did not test were absent on the day of the Common Assessment #3
(student 2 and student 18). Of the 16 students who tested, 10 scored mastery on the Common Assessment (62.5% scored
mastery). The two students who did not pass the Common Assessment, refused to follow the procedures for the Pythagorean
Theorem.
The two individual students are both student number 3 from both first and second period. Both of these students
scored an 85 on the Common Assessment #3. After looking at what the two students got incorrect, they both got number 18
incorrect. Question number 18 covered the application of solving real world problems using the Pythagorean Theorem which
Revised 2015
was covered in objective number two of the unit. This particular questions depth of knowledge was a level 2 meaning it was
more challenging. The students had to use the Pythagorean Theorem to find the hypotenuse. Then after finding the
hypotenuse, they had to add it to the leg in order to answer the question. It was a two-step problem, where the students had
to read carefully in order to understand exactly what was being asked. These two particular students did not add so their
answer was incorrect.
Student #3 from the first period got number 3 and 12 incorrect as well, making it a total of 3 questions incorrect to
result in the score of an 85%. Student #3 from the second period got number 5 and 7 incorrect as well, making it a total of 3
incorrect to result in the score of an 855. After comparing numbers 3, 5, 7 and 12 numbers 3, 5, and 7 were very similar. All
three off these questions provided the students with 4 sets of 3 groups of numbers and the students had to choose the group
of numbers that could form a right triangle by using the Pythagorean Theorem Formula.
Number 12 was applying the Pythagorean Theorem to solve real world problems. The students had to draw a picture
to be able to label the legs. Then they had to apply the use of the Pythagorean Theorem to find the hypotenuse. The students
had to pay close attention to the directions that were given in order to label the triangle correctly. Student number 3 in the
first period did not label his triangle correct and it resulted in him getting the question wrong.
(4) Finally, explain the ways in which you have assigned student grades (or other indicators of student performance), and
what were the overall results?
For the Pre and Post Test it was hand scored. The total number of points was 72. The students could have received 32 points
for the key terms and 40 for application and computation of the Pythagorean Theorem. Common Assessment #3 was graded
through Mastery Connect. Out of the 34 students who took the test five made below a 60. 85% of the students passed, 15%
failed and 56% scored mastery (80 or above).
(5) Based on the overall results, did the students gain from this unit all that you expected? Why or why not?
Yes because out of 34 students who tested only 15% of them failed. I would have hoped more of the students scored
mastery/passed but I am pleased with the results of 85% having a passing score. I feel like the students gained enough
knowledge to pass the Common Assessment and were given ample opportunities for extended instruction or one on one
time.
(6) Include a description of the ways in which these results have been recorded as well as how and to whom they have been
reported.
The results were recorded in Mastery Connect, in my Cooperating teachers grade book, and in PowerSchool. The results are
reported to the parents through Parent Portal on PowerSchool. Mastery connect records the grades and provides feedback
on if the students mastered the concept, are near mastery, or need remediation.
(7) Provide evidence to support the impact on student learning in terms of the number of students who achieved and make
progress toward the unit objectives.
According to the results 85% of the students who tested passed the Common Assessment making a 60 or higher. Of the students who
passed, 56% scored mastery on the Common Assessment making an 80 or higher. Although, I had hoped for a 100% passing rate, I
am pleased that of all the students who tested, I only had 5 students who made below a 60. I feel that my students worked very hard
during to understand the objectives covered in the unit of the Pythagorean Theorem.
I was very pleased with my students performance on their Common Assessment; I had an 85% passing rate
and only 15% of my students failed. The students who did not pass either did not apply themselves or were
Revised 2015
absent from school for many days. I think an 85% passing rate says that I covered the material and concept
very well. My strengths include checking for understanding, time management (use of a timer), providing
feedback, the use of cooperative learning groups and creating engaging activities for the students.
(2) If you were to teach this unit again to the same groups of students, (2) what, instructional decisions would you make to
improve your students performance? What specific aspects of the instruction need to be modified?
If I were to teach this unit again to the same groups of students, I would group the students differently and stay
on top of the students who refuse to follow procedures. I would also call on those specific students more often
to keep them engaged. I would also give the students more hands on activities instead of paper and pencil.
Although I did do a few hands on activities, I would like to incorporate different activities as well. I would like for
the students to create a rap, write a paragraph, act out, or do a project on the Pythagorean Theorem.
The specific aspects of the instruction that need to be modified include the use of key terms more often and
consistently. If I use the key terms more often, then students will become more familiar and comfortable with
using the key terms.
(3) What activities were successful? Which were unsuccessful? Give reasons based on theory or research as to why you
believe the activities were successful or unsuccessful.
I think the Team Pair Solo activity was very successful. Team was all the group members work together to
solve the first example. Pair was two of the students from each group broke off to make a pair and then they
were to work together to solve the next example. Then solo was the pair broke off into individuals to solve the
last example of the page. The students were given a group grade as well as an individual grade.
The Error Analysis activity was also successful because it allowed the students to correct someone elses
mistakes. Majority of the time if the student is able to correct the error, he or she has mastered the concept.
After the students completed the worksheet, they had to present to the class their reasoning on why they were
right about the error.
The Real World Application problems were also a success because it allowed the students to see what they
learn inside the classroom can also be used in their everyday lives. The students did not like having to draw a
corresponding picture to every word problem but in the end they were able to see drawing a picture helps in
solving for the missing side.
The Pythagorean Theorem Worksheet was successful because it was a combination of both objectives for the
unit. The students had to solve a right triangle using the Pythagorean Theorem as well as do real world
application problems.
I think the first activity I used where the students had to verify the Pythagorean Theorem was unsuccessful in
the beginning because the directions were very unclear. I should of reread the instructions but I thought I could
trust the program I got the activity from. But because I was able to monitor and adjust, it ended very well. I was
able to walk around to each student to check their progress and have a quick one on one moment with that
student.
I feel like all of the activities except Verifying the Pythagorean Theorem were successful. The students were
able to comprehend the material and were able to prove it.
Revised 2015
Correct
Students who got the question correct Out
of 34
34 out of 34
Incorrect
Students who got the question incorrect
Out of 34
0 out of 34
27 out of 34
7 out of 34
24 out of 34
10 out of 34
30 out of 34
4 out of 34
16 out of 34
18 out of 34
28 out of 34
6 out of 34
12 out of 34
22 out of 34
29 out of 34
5 out of 34
27 out of 34
7 out of 34
10
28 out of 34
6 out of 34
11
32 out of 34
2 out of 34
12
19 out of 34
15 out of 34
13
31 out of 34
3 out of 34
14
30 out of 34
4 out of 34
15
30 out of 34
4 out of 34
16
30 out of 34
4 out of 34
17
31 out of 34
3 out of 34
18
12 out of 34
22 out of 34
19
25 out of 34
9 out of 34
20
28 out of 34
6 out of 34
Revised 2015
10 / 16
6 / 16
9 / 16
7 / 16
14 / 16
2 / 16
9 / 16
7 / 16
14 / 16
2 / 16
5 / 16
11 / 16
14 / 16
2 / 16
13 / 16
3 / 16
10
14 / 16
2 / 16
11
15 / 16
1 / 16
12
8 / 16
8 / 16
13
15 /16
1 / 16
14
14 / 16
2 / 16
15
14 / 16
2 / 16
16
14 / 16
2 / 16
17
16 / 16
0 / 16
18
9 / 16
7 / 16
19
15 / 16
1 / 16
20
15 / 16
1 / 16
Revised 2015
3
x
1
0
11
1
2
x
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
17
18
x
19
20
from 1st
Period
Student 3
from 2nd
Period
Revised 2015
EDUC 450
COMPONENT
ACCEPTABLE (2)
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNACCEPTABLE/DEVELOPIN
G (1)
DESCRIPTION OF STUDENTS
Description of
Students
ACEI 3.1
NAEYC 1a
Contextual
Factors
collaborating
with others and
sources of
information
ACEI 3.5/NAEYC
5c
Contextual
Factors
ACEI 3.5/NAEYC
3b
Contextual
Factors
ACEI 5.2/NAEYC
2c
Overall Rating
UNIT
Objectives
ACEI 3.3/NAEYC
5b
Revised 2015
PLAN
SCORE
Objectives
ACEI 3.2/NAEYC
5c
Objectives
ACEI 3.2/NAEYC
5c
Overall Rating
Alignment with
Learning
Objectives and
Assessment
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Alignment with
Learning
Objectives and
Assessment
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Overall Rating
Instructional
Plan
NAEYC 5c
Instructional
Plan
NAEYC 5c
Instructional
Plan
NAEYC 5c
Instructional
Plan
NAEYC 5c
Overall Rating
Revised 2015
Selection of
Strategies for
Varying Levels
ACEI 3.3/NAEYC
4b;4c
Design for
Instruction
ACEI 1.0/NAEYC
5c
ASSESSMENTS
Knowledge of
Students Skills
and Prior
Learning
ACEI 3.1
Multiple
Assessment
Modes
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Multiple
Assessment
Modes/NAEYC 3b
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Multiple
Assessment
Modes
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Multiple
Assessment
Modes
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
Revised 2015
Displays no understanding of
students skills and prior
learning that affect instruction.
3b
Multiple
Assessment
Modes
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Provides an appropriate
summary of assessment data to
explain student learning and
communicate information about
student progress and
achievement.
An adequate interpretation is
provided; contains few errors in
accuracy
Overall Rating
Validity of
Assessments
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Validity of
Assessments
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Validity of
Assessments
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Overall Rating
Scoring
Procedures
Explained(Eval.
Crit)
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Analysis of
Student Learning
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Interpretation of
Data and
Student Learning
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
Revised 2015
3b
Interpretation of
Data and
Student Learning
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Interpretation of
Data and
Student Learning
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Overall Rating
Instructional
Decision-making
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3c
Effective
Instruction and
Assessment
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3c
Effective
Instruction and
Assessment
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3c
Overall Rating
Impact on
Student Learning
ACEI 4.0/NAEYC
3b
Clarity and
Accuracy of
Presentation/NA
Revised 2015
Includes incomplete or no
evidence of the impact on
student learning in terms of
numbers of students who
achieved and made progress
toward unit objectives
Is easy to follow and contains
numerous errors in conventions
or grammar usage.
EYC 6b
Reflection/Self
Evaluation
ACEI 5.1/NAEYC
4d
Student Work
TOTAL
Unacceptable/Developing (1)
Candidate demonstrates a limited amount of the
attributes of the standard. Performance indicates
that few competencies have been demonstrated.
Revised 2015
Acceptable/Meets (3)
Candidate demonstrates most of the attributes of
the standard. Performance indicates that the
competency has been demonstrated including
examples, extension, or enrichment.
POINTS
Target/Exceeds (5)
Candidate demonstrates all of the attributes of the
standard. Performance clearly indicates that the
competency has been mastered, including
examples, extension, and enrichment.