Consider Standard 2: Instructional Planning: The teacher plans using state and local school district curricula and standards, effective strategies, resources, and data [emphasis added] to address the differentiated needs of all students. It is because of the lack of specific data that a teacher in a pilot program initially received a Level II in this area. Ultimately, through more observations and her ability to document how she was using data, she scored Level III. But, the initial scare (of not passing) was real.
Currently, we're being told to carefully consider 2.1: Analyzes and uses student learning data to inform planning [emphasis added]. To me, that means that my current formative assessments are helping me determine the lesson plans leading to the summative assessment. My summative assessment is planned, but my lesson planning is flexible to make sure the students arrive at the summative prepared and on time. I don't want my students "just" to make an A, I really want them to learn the material and demonstrate that by making an A! I want them to be changed people because of my instruction!
After my summative assessment, I will log the grades, print the report, and store at least one grade document in my notebook under 2.1 with a note in how the summative report will - or did - guide and direct my lesson plans for the next summative assessment. Essentially, if my students hit the target for this assessment, I'll keep the plans similar; if they don't demonstrate mastery, then I'll adjust my lesson plans. We, probably, all show that our data guides how we give instruction to the next unit, but now we have to intentionally make those decisions and document it.
In short, if the lesson process worked, keep it; if it didn't, analyze the test scores and change the instruction to adapt.
As I noted on pp. 51-52 of my doctoral study
Formative assessments. McLeod (2005) noted that meta-analytic research showed effective formative assessments have a greater impact on improving student achievement, including closing the achievement gap, than “any other instructional practice” (p. 4), supply updated information to allow for redirected instruction, and can serve as benchmarks for annual learning goals. In the classroom setting, McLeod asserted that, “data analysis should cause targeted instructional changes to improve student learning” (p. 5) and student data should be a part of continuous instructional improvement (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Hamilton et al., 2009; Huebner, 2009). Teachers should make instructional decisions based on data from their students’ work accordingly (Lieberman & Miller, 2001), and formative assessments serve as guides for students’ progress toward annual learning goals (Huebner, 2009; McLeod, 2005). Researchers found that effective formative assessment practices have shown to be powerful tools to improve student achievement and that formative assessments provide updated information to which the teacher could allow for redirected instruction that could benefit student learning (Huebner, 2009; McLeod, 2005; Popham, 2009b). Formative assessments can help develop the student-teacher interaction, student motivation, and student achievement (Brookhart et al., 2008; Wiliam, 2007) and can highlight student accomplishments (Tomlinson, 2007). Researchers showed frequent formative assessments revealed students’ thinking (Bransford et al., 2000) and could provide a “realistic measurement of students’ progress” (Dochy et al., 1999, p. 170). The initial content or unit lesson plan should allow for predesigned formative assessments (Black & Wiliam, 2009). As indicated in the March 2010 edition of the First Bell newsletter, the superintendent (Local County School District, 2010a) noted that teachers in Local County use informal benchmark information to design classroom instruction.
Cason, M. G. (2011). Activating Prior Knowledge With Cues and Questions As a Key Instructional Strategy to Increase Student Achievement in Low Socioeconomic Middle Schools. (Ed.D. 3469058), Walden University, United States -- Minnesota. Retrieved from http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=2459520451&Fmt=7&clientId=70192&RQT=309&VName=PQD
In short(er): give an assessment, print out the report, store it under Standard 2, and show in your lesson plans how that assessment is guiding your instruction/curriculum/planning for the next unit. I included in my lesson plans a statement that includes, "____ (Performance Task(s), Post-Test, Unit Test, Section Test) will guide future ___ (today's instruction, future planning, next assessment, next content, next unit)"
Hope this helps. See my website for more information: https://sites.google.com/site/gcason123/
No comments:
Post a Comment