Assessment 3: Unit Plan

Assessment 3: Unit Plan

Narrative

(a) Description and Program Use of the Assessment: The English Education Program has designed as Assessment 3, required by NCTE as an “[a]ssessment of candidate ability to plan,” a unit plan, which candidates submit at the end of a four-day intensive planning workshop, heldduring their semester of student teaching.

(b) Alignment of Assessment with NCTE Standards:Our program’s Unit Plan Assessment aligns with NCTE standards under the categories Attitudes for English Language Arts (NCTE 2.0), Knowledge of English Language Arts (NCTE 3.0), and Pedagogy for English Language Arts (NCTE 4.0). Teacher candidates include with the unit plan a philosophy of teaching, which aligns with standards related to Attitudes for English Language Arts: 2.1, “creating an inclusive and supportive learning environment,” 2.2, “helping students become familiar with their own and other’s cultures,” 2.3, demonstrating reflective practice and pursuing professional growth and collaboration,” 2.5, “making meaningful connections between ELA curriculum and developments in culture, society, and education,” and 2.6, “promoting the arts and humanities in the learning of their students.”

Sections within the unit plan demonstrate a range of attitudes, knowledge, dispositions, and skills needed for effective teaching. The unit plan begins with an in-depth description of the class, which aligns with NCTE standards related to students’ past experiences, sociocultural backgrounds, interests, capabilities, and understandings (2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 4.4). The unit overview demonstrates candidates’ knowledge, specifically, an understanding of how reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, and thinking are interrelated areas of the ELA experience (NCTE 3.1.2), as well as their knowledge of “practices of oral, visual, and written literacy (NCTE 3.2). The rationale for the unit demonstrates their “use of major sources of research and theory related to English language arts to support their teaching decisions” (NCTE 3.7.1). The unit objectives demonstrate candidates’ ability to write objectives that are measurable and can be used to establish a variety of formal and informal assessments and instruments to evaluate processes and products (NCTE 4.10). Candidates’ verb choices (e.g., compare, analyze, interpret) demonstrate knowledge of the need to develop habits of critical thinking (NCTE 2.4). Their unit objectives also demonstrate their “knowledge of the practices of oral, visual, and written literacy” (NCTE 3.2). Through their choice of materials, candidates demonstrate their ability to select resources for instruction (NCTE 4.1), their knowledge of print and nonprint media and technology (NCTE 3.6), and to use materials that promote the arts and humanities in learning (2.6).

The unit section Methods demonstrates the NCTE standards for Candidate Pedagogy and those for knowledge of compositng processes. Candidates are scored on their plans to align curriculum goals with classroom organization and structure (NCTE 4.3), to lead meaningful discussions “for the purposes of interpreting and evaluating ideas presented in oral, written, and/or visual form” (NCTE 4.5), to engage students in “discovering their personal response to texts” (NCTE 4.8), and to provide students with appropriate reading strategies (NCTE 4.9). The Methods section likewise demonstrates candidates’ knowledge of different composing processes (NCTE 3.4.1, 3.4.2).

The Assessment section of the unit plan demonstrates candidates’ ability to integrate assessment consistently into instruction by using a variety of formal and informal assessment activities and instruments (NCTE 4.10), and candidates’ unit Bibliography demonstrates their ability to select a range of resources (NCTE 4.1). Finally, their unit reflection demonstrates candidates’ ability to to use the results of reflective practice to adapt instruction and behavior to assist all students to learn (NCTE 2.3).

(c) Interpretation of Data as Evidence for Meeting Standards:English Education faculty analyzed candidate performance on Assessment 3 using the Average Rubric Performance reports from the rGrade program for the past two years. Findings included the following:

• The majority of our candidates scored 3, 4, or 5 on the five-point rubric, with mean scores for each item never falling below 3.0 (acceptable).
• Using mean scores of 4+ for both years as an indicator, faculty identified several areas of strength across both years: Candidates’ ability to help students become more familiar with their own culture (NCTE 2.2); candidates’ use of reflective practice and professional development (2.3); candidates’ ability to develop objectives that build critical thinking (NCTE 2.4); candidates’ ability to align instruction with the Virginia SOLs; candidates’ use of a variety of methods (NCTE 4.2), and candidates’ classroom use of personal response as a means of making meaning of text (NCTE 4.8). The last finding was also evident in the analysis of portfolio performance reports.
• Areas showing the lowest mean scores in 2009 included the following: NCTE standard 4.7, candidates’ use of learning experiences that emphasize varied uses and purposes for language and communication (mean score of 3.2); NCTE standard 3.4.1, candidates’ developing the use of a variety of writing strategies; and NCTE 4.3, candidates’ integration of interdisciplinary teaching strategies (mean score of 3.0). The mean score for each of these standards rose in 2010.
• In 2010 the only area with mean scores below 3.5 was the score for their unit bibliography. This measure for NCTE standard 4.1 did not correlate with the mean of 3.9 on their unit materials—also a measure for NCTE standard 4.1. Faculty concluded that although candidates understand the importance of and are able to locate extensive unit materials (NCTE 4.1), they are not as diligent about careful citation of these materials.

• For both years candidates scored significantly higher in the unit assessment of Standard 4.10 than in the Analysis of Student Learning assessment. The scores seem to indicate that our teacher candidates understanding the planning of assessment but are less skilled at implementation and analysis.

(d) Description of the Assessment Tool: Teacher candidates are provided with the following directions for the unit plan:

ENGLISH 428

UNIT PLAN

During this intensive unit planning workshop you are to write the first unit you will teach in your student teaching experience. Because you won’t often have the time to fully flesh out a unit plan, and since you will be teaching more than one unit during your student teaching, this will be a one-time opportunity to collaborate with your peers and get substantial feedback from me. It is essential that you attend every session of this workshop in order to fulfill the requirements of English 428. This is the only unit you will develop which will be counted as a grade in this seminar.

During your Teacher Preparation Program at RadfordUniversity you have read about various aspects of middle or high school classroom and have gathered many ideas about how to teach English language arts. Now it is your turn to put your ideas into practice. It is our hope that you will incorporate some of the learning theories we have discussed in previous English Education classes. You should consult all text books used in English 426 and EDUC 440 for ideas to implement in your plans. This unit must be typed using 12 font. Your unit should include the following items:

I. Description of class/es you are developing this unit for.

Grade level (6-12) and subject

Ability level (homogeneous basic, average, honors, etc. or heterogeneous class, mixed abilities);

Class size; description of population (socioeconomic level, ethnicity, cultural heritage, mainstreamed special needs students with IEPs or any ESL students, break down of # boys/girls and # of students from each ethnicity or cultural group. etc.)

Also, write one paragraph about your intimate knowledge of the class as a whole. For instance, what have the students studied previous to this unit, how do students write, what are their interests, hobbies, what do they like to read, do they work well in groups, etc.

II. Description of unit.

Overview of unit. What theme/historical period/literary work does the unit cover? Briefly, what types of things are the students going to be doing—reading, writing, viewing, researching, speaking, etc. Include length of unit—number of days, and length of class period.

Rationale for teaching unit. Why are you teaching this unit? Why are you teaching it this way? Consider these possibilities--curriculum, related to a theme in the literature, identified problem in the school, etc. Consider what you know about learning theory, process writing, grammar in context, writing to learn, etc. as support for your activities and methods.

Learning Objectives. What specifically are the students supposed to know and be able to do by the end of the unit--for example, identify themes in literary work, identify and use figures of speech, journal writing, persuasive essay writing, note cards, how to use CD ROM, how to use the internet for research, etc. Should have at least 6 objectives. (You are specifically stating what the students should know and be able to do after the completion of this unit of study.[These items should be on the pre/post test administered to students.])

Virginia SOLs are you addressing with activities included in this unit (both a separate list and correlated with the above learning objectives and activities).

Pre and Post Test that your students will take and that you will keep in order to document what exactly students learned during your teaching of this unit. These tests do not need to be a part of the students grades although the post test may be. The items on the test (which is the same test both pre and post) should involve specific knowledge students should gain after they have completed that unit of study. (You may include literary terms that you are teaching, vocabulary they should learn, events in a literary work, etc.)

Materials. What materials do you and your students need to have in order to participate in the unit. Include such things as the following (not an exclusive list): textbook/s, journals, writing exercises or prompts (perhaps journal entries) tied to the unit, works of literature (poems, short stories, plays, young adult novels, films, etc). Include a one paragraph plot summary or a copy of the poem and a rationale for including each work again, tied to the unit's focus), projects, assessment/evaluation tools (rubrics, test, study guides, list of terms, handouts, etc.)

Methods. How are you going to help students learn? For instance, group work, individual/group projects—basically I’m asking for how you work with your students. Try to indicate learning theories or concepts behind your strategies.

Outline of Unit broken down into days (Day 1, Day 2, etc). Include a list of discussion topics, writing assignments, mini lessons, readings, etc.

One week of detailed daily lesson plan—5 days. This includes lesson objectives correlated with VA SOLs, rationale, materials, procedures/activities. See format below. All detailed lesson plans must be turned in to your university supervisor and your CT the Wednesday BEFORE you are going to teach them.

Assessment/evaluation of student work. How will you arrive at a grade for this unit? Determine a method of grading that deals with various assignments and products. You must be specific here. Also include the pre/post test administered to the students.

Bibliography Include works of literature used, professional resources, textbooks, articles, films, internet sources, etc. Please annotate each entry giving a brief synopsis of the material.

Two page reflection/evaluation of your unit. Strengths? Weaknesses? Places where you'd have to be particularly careful as a teacher. In other words, address the questions we've been asking all along--Why am I doing what I'm doing? Why am I doing it this way? What have I done to help students learn effectively?

YOU WILL ALSO MARK ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE CUT OUT DUE TO LOSS OF CLASS TIME BECAUSE OF WEATHER.DAILY LESSON PLAN FORMAT

1. Class description.
2. Length of class session
3. Rationale for teaching lesson (theoretical base).
4. Learning objective/s for the day correlated to VA SOLs
5. Materials you and students need on this day including copies of handouts, films, books, etc.
6. Procedure of activities from bell to bell—Simple numbered list in the order in which you will do them. Also include how long each “step” should take in minutes.
7. Correlate the activities with Virginia SOLs as well.

(e) Scoring Guide for the Assessment: Teacher candidates’ university supervisors assess their unit plans during their student teaching. The scoring rubric aligns with NCTE standards and uses a 5-point scale with indicators at Level 1 (unacceptable), 3 (acceptable), and 5 (target). To ensure consistency and program alignment with NCTE standards, the indicators have been adapted from the document “NCTE/NCATE Standards for Initial Preparation of Teachers of Secondary English Language Arts, Grades 7-12”

English Education Unit Assessment
Rubric Content | Rubric Points | Print | eReport
URL:
Description: English Education Unit Assessment
Updated: 7/20/2010 10:40:20 AM
Author: Carolyn Mathews

Top of Form

1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5
Essay
2.1 Essay on your philosophy of teaching / Philosophy shows little evidence of candidate’s desire to create and sustain supportive learning environment (2 / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s desire to create and sustain supportive learning environment (2.1 / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s commitment to creating and sustaining a supportive learning environment (2.1)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.1
Essay
2.2 students become more familiar with their own culture / Philosophy gives little evidence of candidate’s use of ELA to help students become more familiar with their own culture
(2.2) / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s use of ELA to help students become more familiar with their own culture (2.2) / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s extensive and creative use of ELA to help students become more familiar with their own culture (2.2)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.2
Essay
2.3 candidate’s use of reflective practice, professional development, and collaboration / Philosophy provides little evidence of the candidate’s use of reflective practice, professional development, and collaboration (2.3) / it demonstrates the candidate’s use of reflective practice, professional development, and collaboration (2.3) / it demonstrates the candidate’s commitment to reflective practice, professional development, and collaboration that lead toward ability to assist all students to learn (2.3)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.3
Essay
2.5 connections between ELA curriculum and in culture, society, and education / Philosophy fails to demonstrate candidate’s ability to make connections between ELA curriculum and in culture, society, and education (2.5); / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s ability to make connections between ELA curriculum and in culture, society, and education (2.5); / Philosophy demonstrates candidate’s ability to make meaningful and creative connections between ELA curriculum and in culture, society, and education (2.5);
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.5
Essay
2.6 commitment to integrating arts and humanities into daily learning of students / Philosophy provides no evidence of candidate’s commitment to integrating arts and humanities into daily learning of students (2.6) / Philosophy shows candidate’s use of the arts and humanities in daily learning of students (2.6). / Philosophy shows candidate’s commitment to integrating arts and humanities into daily learning of students (2.6)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.6
Description of Class
2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 4.4 Description of Class / Description provides a sketchy account of students’ ability levels, socioeconomic background, and interests. It does little to establish the context for the design of the unit plan, its activities, or assessments. (2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2) / Description provides an adequate account of students’ ability levels, socioeconomic background, and interests. It establishes the context for the design of the unit plan, its activities, and assessments. (2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2) / Description provides detailed account of students’ past experiences, sociocultural backgrounds, interests, capabilities, and understandings. It establishes the context for the design of the unit plan, its activities, and assessments. (2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE2.1, 2.2, 3.1.4, 3.3.2, 4.4
Overview
3.5 Overview Overview of Unit / Overview lacks clarity and specific information about the unit; it shows a lack of knowledge about a range of literature or teaching applications for (3.5) / Overview provides clear information about the unit; it reflects the candidate’s knowledge and use of a range of literature and teaching applications for (3.5) / Overview provides clear, specific information about the unit; it reflects the candidate’s knowledge and use of an extensive range of literature and teaching applications for (3.5)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE3.5
Overview
3.1 thinking as interrelated parts of student learning / Overview fails to reflect the candidate’s ability to involve students in speaking, listening, viewing, and thinking as interrelated parts of student learning(3.1) / Overview reflects the candidate’s ability to involve students in speaking, listening, viewing, and thinking as interrelated parts of student learning(3.1) / Overview reflects the candidate’s ability to design instruction that actively engages all students in speaking, listening, viewing, and thinking as interrelated dimensions of EAL (3.1)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE3.1
Rationale
3.7 Rationale Rationale for teaching unit / Rationale shows a lack of knowledge of major sources of research and theory related to ELA. (3.7) / Rationale demonstrates candidate’s ability to use major sources of research and theory related to ELA as they plan (3.7) / Rationale demonstrates candidate’s strong ability to plan instruction in light of research on, and theories of, how students compose and respond to text (3.7)
Standards aligned to this row:
 NCTE3.7
Learning
4.10 Learning Objectives Learning Objectives / Learning objectives are often not measurable and would often make use of formal and informal assessments problematic (4.10). / Learning objectives are measurable and can be used to establish a variety of formal and informal assessments and instruments to evaluate processes and products (4.10). / Learning objectives are measurable and can be used to establish criteria that allow all students to understand what they know and can do (4.10).