Formative Assessment Template
Progress on Goals
Student Learning Goal / Based on the fact that 40% of students were proficient (green in both FSF and LNF) on the DIBELS in the Fall of 2012, 21% of students were slightly below (yellow or red in either FSF or LNF, or an overall yellow), and 39% of the students were significantly below (red in FSF and LNF), our goal is that 70% of students will read at least at alevel C or above as measured by the TRC in the Spring of 2013, 15% of students will read at least at a level B or above, and the remaining 15% of students will read at least at a level RB or above.Rating / Significant Progress
Rationale / Based on the most recent data posted on MCLASS and the artifacts Ms. A posted, I find evidence that she is on track to meet her Student Learning Goal by the end of the year.
Evidence:
1. By the mid-year benchmark, 15 of her 20 students were reading at a level A or above, making them on track to achieve a level B+ by the end of the year. Of the remaining 5 students, most of them are making steady progress as measured by PSF and NWF progress monitoring scores, to be on track to reach the end of year benchmark (B).
2. Additionally, Ms. A posted several artifacts that demonstrate how she is plans and implements small group reading instruction to target the specific skills for students who are struggling readers including work on site words, phonemic awareness and concepts of print. She also included examples of conference notes she collected based on her instruction to help inform future small group instruction. This is evidence that she is using the data to strategically inform her instruction and move students towards proficiency, as outlined in her SLG.
Professional Practice Goal / In order to meet the needs of the range of learners in my classroom, I will use formal and informal assessment data including DIBELS, TRC, observational survey and student work with my grade levelteam strategicallyin order to: (1) identify students in need of tier 2 and 3 supports, (2) match interventions to needs; (3) identify how to monitor students over time and (4) revisit students every six weeks to monitor progress. I will measure my progress towards these goals by collecting small group lesson plans focusing on targeted skills grade level RTI forms( for Tier 3 students) and student work, colleague and supervisor feedback.
Rating / Significant Progress
Rationale / Based on my observations of Ms. A’s instruction, grade level CPT, and artifacts posted, including MCLASS data, I find evidence that she is on track to meet her Professional Practice Goal.
Evidence:
1. As discussed under her SLG, by the middle of the year 15 out of 20 students were reading at a level A or above, putting them on track to reach the end of year target of an instructional level B+.
2. Posted lesson plans document how Ms. A plans for the instructional core AND small group instruction that target students who need to work on specific skills (site word recognition, phonemic awareness, letter-sound correspondence and/or concepts of print). She also included evidence that she gathers conference notes to help inform her small group planning and informally monitor student progress. Additionally, she regularly progress monitors students using DIBELS.
3. As observed during CPT sessions, Ms. A works with her grade level colleagues to develop intervention plans for students performing below benchmark including strategic small group and other small group interventions around core skills implemented by the Learning Specialist. The team revisits these students every 6 weeks to determine if interventions are working and students are making progress, or if adjustments are necessary.
Performance on Standards
Standard / 1. Curriculum, Planning, and AssessmentRating / Proficient
Rationale / Based on my observations of Ms. A's instruction, CPT sessions and posted artifacts, I find evidence that she is proficient in this standard, specifically in the areas of I-A-4 (Lesson Planning), I-B-2 (Adjustment to Practice) and I-C-3 (Sharing Conclusions with Students).
Evidence:
1. Through my own informal observations and posted artifacts, I see evidence that Ms. A is thoughtfully planning whole group instruction, small group instruction and centers across all content areas. For example, I recently observed a whole-class reading lesson focusing onHermanas,in which she asked pre-planned text dependent questions, "Did they really leave the house? Why?" She facilitated a discussion around these questions by asking students to turn and talk with their peers to defend their reasoning. When students shared out she pushed them to explain their thinking, "why do you think that? Do you agree with him? Can you say more?" Because questions were thoughtfully planned in advance, the lesson was sufficiently rigorous and provided students with opportunities to delve more deeply into the text in critical areas that deepened their comprehension of the text. This culminated with an Open Response question. I also see evidence of thoughtful whole-group and small group planning in Ms. A's artifacts. Finally,I see a shift towards using the school’s method of objectives (focusing on the doing AND the learning) in her planning and posting of objectives (Element I-A-4).
2. As discussed in-depth under her PPG and SLG, Ms. A provided strong evidence that she is using multiple sources of data including conferences notes and DIBELS progress monitoring assessments to drive her instructional decision making, particularly during small group reading instruction (I-B-2). Small groups target specific skills students need to work on based on this data and future plans are determined by her assessment of their progress. Ms. A also collaborates with her team members during grade level RTI meetings to match specific interventions to students in need of those supports either by Ms. A or the Learning Specialist.
3. As observed during recent observations of reading and writing instruction, and documented in her artifacts, Ms. A is thoughtful about providing students with descriptive feedback and engaging students in constructive conversations that target specific skills and opportunities for growth. For example, as observed during a writing lesson, I saw Ms. A providing one-on-one conferences with students around their Open Responses. Within these conferences, she provided them with targeted feedback in specific areas (add more details, encoding strategies, clearer explanations, etc.). Additionally, during the whole-class reading lesson referenced above, Ms. A provided students with feedback during turn and talk sessions and whole-class discussions through questioning, "I think what I hear you are saying is… is that right?”“Can you say more? “Why do you think that is?" Her regular use of feedback helps students make changes to their practices and clearly communicates that they learning and effort is valued in her community (I-C-3).
Next Steps:
Element I-A-3. Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design: As we transition to the common core, all grade level teams will be making the transition from curriculum driven planning to standards driven unit planning. This year, her grade level team began this work in math and in writing, co-constructing rigorous units aligned to the CCSS. Ms.A should continue to familiarize herself with the CCSS so she can continue to engage in thoughtful, standards-driven unit planning and lesson planning that ensures all content areas are well aligned to the standards and sufficiently rigorous.
Standard / II. Teaching All Students
Rating / Proficient
Rationale / Based on my observations of her instruction, artifacts posted and participation in grade level CPT sessions and CCL/PD sessions, I find evidence that Ms. A is proficient in this standard, specifically in the elements of: II-A-2. Student Engagement; II-A-3. Meeting Diverse Needs, II-B-1. Safe Learning Environment and II-D-2. High Expectations.
Evidence:
1. I have observed strong evidence that Ms. A thoughtfully plans her lessons using instructional practices that are likely to motivate and engage most students. During a recent read aloud, I observed her giving students access to challenging text-dependent questions using turn and talk strategically. Many of her artifacts also demonstrate center and small group activities, in which students are engaged in hands-on, multi-sensory learning experiences (II-A-2).
2. I also see evidence that Ms. A thinks about the range of learners in her community and uses practices including tiered instruction and scaffolds to accommodate differences in learning styles, needs, interests and levels of readiness. Her use of accountable talk during the read aloud ofHermanas,helped to make challenging, text-dependent questions accessible. Her use of centers and small group lessons provide students with the opportunity to engage in a range of interactive activities that address core literacy concepts including site word recognition, phonemic awareness, letter-sound correspondence and writing in hands-on, engaging ways. She also provides students with choices to engage in activities such as blocks and dramatic play. This is well documented by her artifacts (II-A-3).
3. Ms. A demonstrates and communicates high expectations for her learners both in terms of academic performance and behavior. As observed during a recent read aloud, she is working with her colleague to plan challenging, text-dependent questions that push students back into the text to deepen understanding. As students respond to these questions with their partners and the class, she pushes them to elaborate on their thinking, "Can you say more about that?" "Why do you think that?" "How do you know?" She is also pushing herself to co-construct and implement Open Response instruction and more challenging math lessons (II-D-2).
4. One of Ms. A's greatest strengths is her cultivation of a positive classroom climate. Every time I enter her classroom, it is notably safe, structured and well-managed with clear routines in place and evidence that the core values are reinforced. Students demonstrate respect for their peers and their teacher. It is also evidence that they feel safe to contribute to challenging discussions with their partners and the whole class and take risks at the classroom. Students function well in whole groups, partners, small groups and independently in centers or during independent work. It is evident that they have been taught clear expectations for behavior and performance and have truly internalized these expectations (II-B-1).
Next Steps:
II-A-3. Meeting Diverse Needs: While I do see evidence that Ms. A is thinking thoughtfully about the range of learners in her classroom community in her planning and instruction, I do see opportunities to continue to grow in this element. She can think about this during whole group (how can she make mini lessons as interactive and hands on as possible through use of white boards, fish bowls, clip boards for writing/drawing, accountable talk, etc.), small group (interactive small group lessons that involve manipulatives and multi-sensory strategies to reinforce key concepts) and also when thinking about center-based/independent tasks for students performing at a range of levels and abilities including high achieving students and those in need of significant support. Ms. A's grade level team began to think about this in math this year through their unit planning and she is encouraged to continue to work with her grade level team to unpack this through co-planning and when possible, experimenting with co-teaching models. She is also encouraged to work with the SPED consultant on this area of her practice in the future.
Standard / III. Family & Community Engagement
Rating / Proficient
Rationale / Based on my observations of her interactions with parents and families, participation in school-wide family events and posted artifacts, I find evidence that Ms. A is proficient in this standard, specifically in the areas of: III-A-1. Parent and Family Engagement; III-B-2. Curriculum Support and III-C-1/III-C-2.Two-Way, Culturally Proficient Communication.
Evidence:
1. Ms. A looks for opportunities to thoughtfully engage parents in her classroom community and in their child's learning. This includes hosting room parents, inviting parents in to share aspects of their culture (e.g. parent presentation on Cape Verde) and looking for opportunities to link the curriculum to parents (Hermanas lesson in which parents were invited to translate words in their own language, the way Hermanas does in Spanish). Ms. A also participates in all school-wide Family Events to engage parents in their child's classroom learning, including Family Literacy and Math Night. (III-A-1).
2. Ms. A also clearly communicates expectations around curriculum and behavior, and student progress towards these expectations regularly using weekly/daily progress reports and participation in Orientations/Open Houses and Family Nights (see artifacts). (III-B-2).
3. Ms. A facilitates strong two-way, culturally proficient communication with families. Her progress reports provide opportunities for parents to respond with their own comments or questions(see artifacts). Additionally, parents have made a point to reach out to me in writing to express their sincere appreciation and strong satisfaction with her instruction and communication in the classroom. Ms. A is very accessible to and supportive of families, while still holding them accountable for participating in and reinforcing their child's learning (III-C-1/2).
Standard / IV. Professional Culture
Rating / Proficient
Rationale / Based on my observations of Ms. A's participation in grade level CPT meetings, whole school PD, CCL sessions and school leadership teams (PBIS), I find evidence that she is proficient in this standard. Specifically, I find evidence in elements: IV-A-1. Reflective Practice, IV-B-1. Professional Learning and Growth and IV-C-1. Professional Collaboration.
Evidence:
1. I regularly observe evidence that Ms. A is a reflective practitioner. She approaches grade level CPT sessions and whole-school PD sessions with an openness to learning and applying new ideas and concepts in her own classroom including RTI planning to assign students to specific interventions, implementing "close reading" practices as discussed during CPT during read alouds, implementing Open Response instruction and assessments, math differentiation planning, and more (IV-A-1).
2. Ms. A is also willing to seek out and apply ideas for improving her practice from supervisors, colleagues, professional development activities and other resources to gain expertise and/or assume different instructional strategies. Most recently, she signed up for course work on ELL instruction (Retell) and participated in another professional development opportunity with some of her colleagues, to learn and share strategies for building a more inclusive school community (IV-B-1).
3. Ms. A consistently and effectively collaborates with colleagues in such work as developing standards-based units (writing and math unit development), examining student work (open responses), analyzing student performance data (RTI meetings focusing on reading progress as measured by DIBELS) and planning appropriate interventions (IV-C-1). She has worked with her colleagues in truly implementing authentic co-planning across multiple content areas. She has also worked with colleagues to co-construct the NAEYC portfolio.
Overall Rating
RatingExemplary, Proficient, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory / Proficient