Running head: PLANNING, PREPARATION, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT 1

Planning, Preparation, Instruction, and Assessment

Elizabeth Churchill

Regent University

In partial fulfilment of requirements for UED 495/496, Spring 2018

Running head: PLANNING, PREPARATION, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT 2

Planning, preparation, instruction, and assessment are critical elements in teaching that

help both the students and the teacher when in the classroom. Usually, a teacher is given a pacing

guide for the year on what subjects need to be taught and when. The teacher uses this to plan

lessons and assignments that she will give her students so that they are able to learn the material

in a careful way. However, teachers also need to know how to pace their students. This can be

done in a variety of ways, but pre-assessments are the most common on how and where to start

the material for the students. During this time, it is important to stay flexible when planning

because there may be times when enrichment or remediation needs to take place. Post-

assessments also help guide the teacher to what material can be mastered next. Therefore,

planning, preparation, instruction, and assessment all affect one another and effect how the

students succeed in learning the material. To show how I have implemented careful planning,

preparation, instruction, and assessment in my teaching, I will show pre- and post-assessments

and the quantitative results from those assessments.

The first artifact is an example of the pre-assessment given to my third-grade students on

rational numbers. It supports the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOLs) 3.3 and 3.7, which states

that “The student will a) name and write fractions (including mixed numbers) represented by a

model; b) model fractions (including mixed numbers) and write the fractions’ names; and c)

compare fractions having like and unlike denominators, using words and symbols (>, <, or =),”

and that “3.7 The student will add and subtract proper fractions having like denominators of 12

or less,” (Mathematics Standards of Learning for Virginia Public Schools, 2009). The pre-

assessment is mostly consisted of standard 3.3a, but it does provide both of these standards to an

extent. It was decided to give the students this pre-test so that my cooperating teacher and I

would know where to start teaching fractions to the students. (At this point in my student
Running head: PLANNING, PREPARATION, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT 3

teaching placement, I was giving the class back to my cooperating teacher.) Once the pre-

assessment was scored, I could see where students would need help. Based on what students got

wrong on the pre-test, small groups were made to support the learners.

I really enjoyed using the pre-assessment because I could see where students were and

what we needed to go over. In this case, I needed to teach the students the representation models

of fractions so that they could understand what they represented. Once students understood the

models, then we could move onto how fractions work. This instruction was presented in whole

group settings and small group settings to students based on what their individual needs were.

Most students did not understand the number line model for fractions, so this was done in a

whole group lesson, where fractions of a circle and a set were done in small group because only

some students needed support in these areas. Informal teacher observation was done during this

time to see if students understood the material, (Webb, 2017, p. 398).

The second part of my first artifact is the post-assessment on SOL 3.3a. In this simple

assessment, students had to recognize and write the models representing fractions. This

assessment was given to the students after we knew that the students could easily determine how

to recognize fractions on a number line and within a set. By giving the students this formative

test, I could tell if the students had “mastered the learning outcomes…[or] provide corrective

prescriptions to improve learning,” if needed for the individual student, (Waugh, 2013, p.7). It is

important to give formative assessments to so that on performance tasks or standardized tests

teachers know if that student will be able to use the knowledge he or she gained on that particular

topic. By giving the post-assessment to the students it helped me on how I would pace my

lessons or if I needed to clarify anything before moving on.

Running head: PLANNING, PREPARATION, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT 4

Another key piece that I used to determine the small groups and whole group lessons I

would do was my second artifact, which is the quantitative data results from the pre- and post-

assessments. In the pre-assessment data results, I saw that most students needed direct instruction

on fractions, however, since these students were in the gifted cluster knew that they could pick

up concepts easily. Therefore, I chose to start the fractions unit whole group with learning the

different types of models or representations that fractions could have. Through the data I could

infer that most students had trouble on recognizing the models on the pre-test, (Waugh, 2013, p.

225). That’s why I chose to start the unit whole group. However, through other formative

activities, some of the students that were highlighted on the pre-assessment data were supported

through small group mini-lessons. This helped some of the students. For example, Student 1 was

in my small group that learned more on fractions of a set and of a circle. His score improved

exceedingly from the pre-test. This quantitative data showed me that with purposely planned

activities and assessments that students can grow and learn from their academic mistakes.

Through these artifacts I saw true student achievement and growth. I also saw “to what

extent they [the standards] have been achieved,” Wiggins, 2005, p. 6). By seeing this, it has led

me to believe that when you set up the student for success, then that child will succeed

academically. This has impacted my teaching philosophy because when you are setting the

student up for success they are going to work harder and feel happier about themselves and

therefore, they will be achieving their own academic goals. Thus, when planning, preparing,

instructing, and assessing you are should be setting the student up for success, so that they may

have the opportunity to learn the material and excel at it.

Running head: PLANNING, PREPARATION, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT 5

References

Mathematics Standards of Learning for Virginia Public Schools [PDF]. (2009, February).

Retrieved March 11, 2018, from Virginia Department of Education website:

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/sol/standards_docs/mathematics/2009/stds_math3.pd

Waugh, C. K., & Gronlund, N. E. (2013). Assessment of Student Achievement (Tenth ed.).

Boston, MA: Pearson.

Webb, L. D., & Metha, A. (2017). Foundations of American Education (Eighth ed.). Boston,

MA: Pearson.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Second ed.). Boston, MA:

Pearson.