Field/Clinical/Internship Practice Requirements For EDUC 439 (Biology/Chemistry/Physics) I.
Catalog Description: Study of secondary teaching methods (Grades 6-­‐12) from the standpoints of theory and practice, curriculum objectives and standard implementation, materials, and evaluation and assessment. Included are demonstrations, discussions, lectures, classroom participation, and field observations. Prerequisites: major in Science/Biology-­‐Teacher Certification option and Educ 301. Corequisite: EIS 303. II.
Population Served: Candidates completing the teacher certification option for a B.S. in Biology, Chemistry, or Physics. Candidates are typically within 2 to 3 semesters of student teaching when they complete this course. Beginning with the 2010/2011 academic year, candidates are being encouraged to take this course prior to Biology 481 so that they are better prepared to complete the assignments in that class and so that they are more likely to take their first field experience while taking this methods course rather than prior to taking this methods course. III.
Number of Required Field/Internship hours: The field component for this course has two parts. The first part is the corequisite EIS 303 course (though some students complete EIS 304 or 592 in lieu of 303 depending upon the sequence of courses they take). The second component is a 10-­‐hour field experience requirement. IV.
Required Activities: A. EIS 303 Requirements for EDUC 439: During this field experience, candidates are required to complete a work sample similar to the one they will be required to complete during student teaching (i.e. the Western Teacher Work Sample for Science). This is above and beyond what is expected by the EIS 303 instructor and is submitted as an assignment for EDUC 439. The Work Sample required does allow students to use some of the same lessons that are submitted as part of the EIS 303 course, but must follow the guidelines as set forth in the WTWS for Science and is scored according to that rubric (which incorporates all aspects of the WTWS but has additional components). B. 10-­‐hour Field Experience: The intent of these 10 hours is to give candidates an opportunity to experience alternate aspects of teaching outside the typical in-­‐classroom teaching experiences. Candidates may choose from a variety of options to fulfill this requirement including: 1. Parent-­‐Teacher Conferences (up to 3 hours total). The Candidate may earn hours by participating or observing parent/teacher conferences alongside their EIS 303 mentor teacher. 2. School Field Trip – Grades 6-­‐12 (up to 5 hours for any given field trip). The candidate may earn hours by participating in a school field trip. The field trip may involve students of any grade between 6 and 12 inclusive but must be appropriate for a science class. Whole grade field trips may be approved if the site visited incorporates science at a reasonable level. For example, a local school regularly 3.
4.
5.
6.
V.
takes the entire 7th grade class to Wildlife Prairie Park near Peoria, IL. Since this is science appropriate, it has been approved. School Science Club Events – Grades 6-­‐12 (up to 3 hours for any single or combination of events). The candidate may earn hours by assisting with a science club event in the evening such as star gazing, team preparation, etc. To be counted, these events should be related to the school curriculum and must involve the club sponsor (a science teacher) and students. Biology Day (up to 5 hours for the single event) – This is a yearly event sponsored by WIU for high schools within the WIU region. Since this is an all-­‐day school field trip for all participating schools, candidates may earn up to five hours of observation credit. Candidates may assist with several aspects of the events that day. Candidates are required to discuss what is involved with preparing students for field trips with at least one teacher who brought a class to participate. They are also expected to observe student participants and note management issues and student behavior issues they may need to address if they were to have students participate in similar events in the future. Chemistry and Physics Demonstration Show (Up to 3 hours for the single event). This is a yearly event sponsored by WIU for schools and the community. Since some of the preparation for this event is required of candidate’s to prepare for the show, they are given partial credit for that preparation time, similar to prepping for a lab. Candidates who receive credit for this must participate in the show as well as talk with at least one teacher who brought a class. That discussion, as with the Biology Day event, should focus on how the teacher prepared the students, teacher expectations for their students, and similar academic, logistic, and management issues. Adding time to their EIS 303 field experience (Up to 10 hours). This is not the preferred option but sometimes is the only available option for some candidates. When candidates select this option, they are asked to do something different that their normal EIS 303 experience. This might involve staying for an extra class period so that they can teach the same lesson a second time to a different group of students; assisting other classes with outdoor activities or activities that take place out of the traditional lecture or lab room; assisting with a special education science class; etc. Candidates must request approval of the option in advance of completing it. How Activities Are Assessed: A. EIS 303 Requirements for EDUC 439 This assignment is assessed using a similar rubric as is used for the Student Teaching Work Sample for Science (see appendix). B. 10-­‐hour field experience The candidates submit a log along with an explanation of what they did and what they learned from the experience. The candidates receive scores based upon the thoroughness of their explanations and their appropriate use of syntax in their writing. Below is the rubric used in scoring their reflections: Not Met: The candidate does not describe each of the experiences and/or the description does not address the diversity of the experience (i.e. what they did, what they learned, and/or how they anticipate implementing what they learned in their future teaching). Met: The candidate provides a reflection of each of their experiences in which they provide a brief discussion of what they did, what they learned, and how they anticipate implementing what they learned during their future teaching experiences. Target: In addition to items included in met, the discussion provides insight about their development as teachers and the kinds of professional development this suggests they might need as they progress to student teaching. Appendix: WTWS Rubric used in Educ 439 TEACHING PROCESS 1 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 1 Prompt) Contextual Factors Indicator Description of community, district and school factors that may impact student learning Task 1.1 Description of classroom factors that may impact student learning Task 1.2 Unacceptable (1) Description of community, district and school factors that may impact student learning is severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Description of classroom factors that may impact student is severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Acceptable (2) Basic, accurate and perceptive description of community, district and school factors that may impact student learning is provided. Basic, accurate and perceptive description of classroom factors that may impact student learning is provided. Target (3) Detailed, accurate and perceptive description of community, district and school factors that may impact student learning is provided. Detailed, accurate and perceptive description of classroom factors that may impact student learning is provided. Score Description of student characteristics that may impact student learning Task 1.3 Identification and discussion of the potential instructional implications of one or more contextual factor(s) as informed by your understanding of relevant major schools of thought Task 1.4 Legal and Ethical Issues Task 1.4 Description of student characteristics that may impact student learning is severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Identification and discussion of the potential instructional implications of one or more contextual factor(s) informed by understanding of the relevant major schools of thought is limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic, accurate and perceptive description of student characteristics that may impact student learning is provided. Basic and accurate identification and thoughtful discussion of the potential instructional implications of one or more contextual factor(s) informed by understanding of the relevant major schools of thought is provided. Detailed, accurate and perceptive description of student characteristics that may impact student learning is provided. Detailed and accurate identification and thoughtful discussion of the potential instructional implications of one or more contextual factor(s) informed by understanding of the relevant major schools of thought is provided. Identification and discussion of potential legal and ethical issues regarding science safety is limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic and accurate identification and thoughtful discussion of the legal and ethical issues regarding science safety potential is provided. Detailed and accurate identification and thoughtful discussion of the potential legal and ethical issues regarding science safety is provided. TEACHING PROCESS 2 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 2 Prompt) Learning Objectives and Benchmarks Indicator Benchmarks and Illinois Learning Standards for unit plan Task 2.1 Alignment of daily objectives with benchmarks identified for the unit plan Task 2.2 Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Benchmarks at the State and National level for the unit plan are inappropriate, insufficient in number, and/or not identified by number and name for the content to be taught in the unit. Inappropriate number of daily objectives for each benchmark identified for the unit plan. Benchmarks at the State and National level for the unit plan are appropriate and sufficient in number for the content to be taught in the unit. Appropriate number of daily objectives that are aligned with each benchmark identified for the unit plan. Target (3) Score Benchmarks at the State and National level are appropriate, sufficient in number, and labeled by both number and name to describe the content to be taught in the unit. Appropriate number of daily objectives that are clearly aligned with each benchmark identified for the unit plan. Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) Score Rationale for appropriateness of daily objectives Task 2.3 Daily objective(s) is/are inappropriate because they fail to consider the developmental level, pre-­‐requisite knowledge/skills, and contextual factors of the students in the classroom. The majority of daily objectives are appropriate because they consider the developmental level, pre-­‐requisite knowledge/skills, and contextual factors of the students in the classroom. All of the daily objectives are appropriate because they consider the developmental level, pre-­‐
requisite knowledge/skills, and contextual factors of the students in the classroom. Alternative Conceptions Task 2.3 The daily objectives fail to appropriately address potential alternative conceptions students might hold. The daily objectives address potential alternative conceptions students might hold as identified through the concept interview or a limited literature review. The daily objectives appropriately address alternative conceptions students may hold as identified through a thorough review of the literature. TEACHING PROCESS 3 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 3 Prompt) Assessment Plan Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Task 3.1: Description of the type of assessment The type of assessment planned for one or more of the three phases of assessment (pre-­‐
assessment, formative assessment, post-­‐assessment) is inappropriate, inadequate, or missing for the objectives. The type of assessment planned for each of the three phases of assessment (pre-­‐assessment, formative assessment, post-­‐
assessment) is appropriate and adequate for the objectives. Target (3) Score The type of assessment planned for each of the three phases of assessment (pre-­‐assessment, formative assessment, post-­‐
assessment) will enable the candidate to gather highly relevant and comprehensive data about students’ knowledge and skills in meeting the objectives. The assessments planned are The assessments planned are appropriately designed to get at appropriately designed to get at students’ alternative students’ alternative conceptions conceptions. as well as to get at either the depth at which those alternative conceptions are held or the variety of inaccurate links among concepts the students’ have developed. Task 3.1: Alternative Conceptions The assessments planned are not appropriately designed to get at students’ alternative conceptions. Task 3.1: Description of the adaptations for the assessments The adaptations are inadequate or inappropriate for the type of assessment and/or of limited value in helping all learners demonstrate their knowledge/skills. The adaptations are adequate, appropriate for type of assessment, and enable all learners to demonstrate their knowledge/skills. The adaptations are varied, appropriate for the type of assessment, and enable all learners to fully demonstrate their knowledge/skills. Task 3.2: Rationale for the selection of the pre-­‐
assessment The rationale does not provide an adequate and appropriate explanation of the alignment of the pre-­‐assessment with instructional objectives and/or does not explain how it reflects The rationale provides an adequate and appropriate explanation of the alignment of the pre-­‐assessment with instructional objectives and adequately describes how it The rationale provides a comprehensive and insightful explanation of the alignment of the pre-­‐assessment with instructional objectives and includes a thorough and clear Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of student learning. reflects an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of student learning. discussion of how it reflects an accurate, consistent and fair evaluation of student learning. Task 3.2: Rationale for the selection of the formative assessments The rationale does not provide an adequate and appropriate explanation of the alignment of the formative assessments with instructional objectives and/or does not explain how they reflect an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of student learning and progress towards achieving the unit benchmarks and objectives. The rationale provides an adequate and appropriate explanation of the alignment of the formative assessments with instructional objectives and adequately describes how they reflect an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of student learning and progress towards achieving the unit benchmarks and objectives. Task 3.2: Rationale for the selection of the post-­‐
assessment Task 3.3: Pre-­‐
assessment The rationale does not provide an adequate and appropriate explanation of the alignment of the post-­‐assessment with instructional objectives and/or does not explain how it reflects an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of student learning. Task 3.3: Post –assessment Task 3.4: Formative assessments One or more of the unit objectives are not assessed; the items or tasks are not aligned with the unit’s instructional objectives; and/or the criteria for scoring are inappropriate or do not provide objective and sufficient information about the extent to which students have already achieved or are prepared to achieve the objectives. One or more of the unit objectives are not assessed; the items or tasks are not aligned with instructional objectives; and/or the criteria for scoring are inappropriate or do not provide objective and sufficient information about the extent to which students achieved the objectives. The formative assessment plan, or criteria for evaluation to determine how students are progressing toward achieving all unit objectives, is limited or not provided and provides little or no information about the extent to which students are achieving the objectives. The rationale provides a comprehensive and insightful explanation of the alignment of the formative assessments with instructional objectives and includes a thorough and clear discussion of how they reflect an accurate, consistent and fair evaluation of student learning and progress towards achieving the unit benchmarks and objectives. The rationale provides an The rationale provides a adequate and appropriate comprehensive and insightful explanation of the alignment of explanation of the alignment of the post-­‐assessment with the post-­‐assessment with instructional objectives and instructional objectives and adequately describes how it includes a thorough and clear reflects an accurate, consistent, discussion of how it reflects an and fair evaluation of student accurate, consistent and fair learning. evaluation of student learning. All of the unit objectives are All of the unit objectives are assessed; the items and tasks assessed; the items or tasks are are adequately aligned with the fully aligned with the instructional objectives; and the instructional objectives; and the criteria for scoring are criteria for scoring are targeted appropriate and provide to provide objective and specific objective and sufficient information about the extent to information about the extent to which students have already which students have already achieved or are prepared to achieved or are prepared to achieve the objectives. achieve the objectives. All of the unit objectives are All of the unit objectives are assessed; the items and tasks assessed; the items are fully are adequately aligned with aligned with the instructional instructional objectives; and the objectives; and the criteria for criteria for scoring are scoring are targeted to provide appropriate and provide objective and specific objective and sufficient information about the extent to information about the extent to which students have achieved which students achieved the the objectives. objectives The formative assessment plan The formative assessment plan or criteria for evaluation to or criteria for evaluation to determine how students are determine how students are progressing toward achieving all progressing toward achieving all unit objectives is/are unit objectives is/are highly appropriate and adequate and relevant and comprehensive and provides some information provides specific information about the extent to which about the extent to which students are achieving the students are achieving the objectives. objectives. Score Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) Task 3.5: Rationale for the assessment adaptations The rationale describing how the adaptation will enable individual students to demonstrate what they know is limited or does not reflect an understanding of the difficulties students may encounter when completing the pre-­‐assessment, formative assessments, or post-­‐
assessment for the unit. The rationale describing how the adaptation will enable individual students to demonstrate what they know is adequate and reflects an understanding of the difficulties students may encounter when completing the pre-­‐assessment, formative assessments, and post-­‐assessment for the unit. The rationale describing how the adaptation will enable individual students to demonstrate what they know is insightful and reflects a sophisticated understanding of the difficulties all students may encounter when completing the pre-­‐assessment, formative assessments, and post-­‐assessment for the unit. Score TEACHING PROCESS 4 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 4 Prompt) Design for Instruction Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) Task 4.1: Presentation of the results of the pre-­‐assessment Visual representation of pre-­‐
assessment data does not include results for each unit objective and/or pre-­‐
assessment, the data are incomplete, and/or errors in calculations are evident. Visual representation of the alternative conceptions is incomplete or inaccurate and/or errors in the calculations are evident. Visual representation of pre-­‐
assessment data includes results for each unit objective and/or assessment, the data are complete, and the calculations are correct. Visual representation of pre-­‐
assessment data includes results for each unit objective and/or pre-­‐assessment, and the data are complete, correct, and presented in a way that facilitates analysis. In addition to items included under acceptable, the data are presented in a way to facilitate analysis. Discussion of one or more objectives is missing, limited, or inconsistent with the data in the visual representations; the extent to which students have already acquired the knowledge/skills in the objectives is not clearly or accurately described; and/or discussion of what the data indicate about students’ prior knowledge, patterns of errors, and misconceptions is limited. Discussion of specific instructional technologies implemented in the lessons and/or how those technologies have the potential to impact student learning is limited. Fewer than three (303) or four (304) lesson plans (excluding days for administering pre-­‐ and post assessments) are included and/or one or more lesson plans are inadequate in the Discussion adequately addresses each objective and is consistent with the data in the visual representations; the extent to which students have already acquired the knowledge/skills in the objectives is clearly and accurately described; and some discussion of what the data indicate about students’ prior knowledge, patterns of errors, and misconceptions is provided. Discussion of each objective is detailed and consistent with the data in the visual representations; the extent to which students have already acquired the knowledge/skills in the objectives is thoroughly described; and a thorough discussion of what the data indicate about students’ prior knowledge, patterns of errors, and misconceptions is provided. Adequate discussion of specific instructional technologies implemented in the lessons and how those technologies have the potential to impact student learning is provided. Detailed discussion of specific instructional technologies implemented in the lessons with specific evidence of how those technologies have the potential to positively impact student learning is provided. At least three (303) or four (304) lesson plans (excluding days for administering pre-­‐ and post assessments) are included and each lesson plan (1) addresses previously identified objectives; (2) provides Task 4.1: Presentation of the alternative conceptions identified in the pre-­‐assessment Task 4.1: Discussion of the pre-­‐assessment data Task 4.2: Discussion of the use of instructional technology Task 4.3: Number of lesson plans Visual representation of the alternative conceptions is complete or accurate and the calculations are correct. At least three (303) or four (304) lesson plans (excluding days for administering pre-­‐ and post assessments) are included and each lesson plan (1) addresses previously identified objectives; (2) provides Score Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) following ways: (1) previously identified objectives are not included; (2) instructional procedures are not sequential and/or do not clearly and sufficiently address the objectives; (3) process/questions to check for understanding or promote critical or creative thinking are limited, irrelevant, or missing. sequential instructional procedures that clearly and sufficiently address the objectives; and (3) includes sufficient and relevant questions/processes to check for understanding and promotes critical or creative thinking. Techniques to address student behaviors which may negatively impact student learning are not relevant or have not been included. Management procedures to ensure that each lesson proceeds smoothly, efficiently, and without confusion are in adequate or not provided. Procedures to accommodate all learners are not specified for both the delivery of instruction and independent practice and/or accommodations will have a limited impact on the ability of all learners to achieve the lesson objectives. Relevant techniques which address student behaviors that may negatively impact student learning are included. Adequate management procedures to ensure that each lesson proceeds smoothly, efficiently, and without confusion are provided. A limited number of relevant community, district, school, and classroom factors that impact student learning during the unit are discussed. A sufficient number of relevant community, district, school and classroom factors that impact student learning during the unit are discussed. detailed, highly relevant instructional procedures that utilize best teaching practices specifically targeted to achieve each lesson objective; and (3) includes an appropriate number of relevant processes/questions designed to check for understanding; to elicit students’ misconceptions; and to promote critical and creative thinking and a deeper understanding of the objectives. Highly relevant and effective techniques which address student behaviors that may negatively impact student learning are included. Highly effective management procedures which ensure that each lesson proceeds smoothly, efficiently, and without confusion are integrated throughout the unit. Highly effective procedures that accommodate all learners discussed in Contextual Factors are integrated into both the delivery of instruction and independent practice and accommodations will positively impact the ability of all learners to achieve or extend beyond the knowledge/skills included in the lesson objectives. Highly relevant community, district, school, and classroom factors that impact student learning during the unit are discussed in detail. A limited number of relevant student characteristics that impact student learning during the unit are discussed. Discussion of how pre-­‐
assessment data was used to select activities, assignments, and resources is limited or not relevant. Task 4.5: Theories Discussion and/or relevant utilized to create examples of how the unit unit. reflects an understanding of specific theories of how students best learn, the A sufficient number of relevant student characteristics that impact student learning during the unit are discussed. Discussion of how pre-­‐
assessment data was used to select activities, assignments, and resources is adequate and relevant. Adequate discussion and sufficient relevant examples of how the unit reflects an understanding of specific theories of how students’ best Highly relevant student characteristics that impact student learning during the unit are discussed in detail. Discussion of the use of pre-­‐
assessment data to select activities, assignments, and resources is highly relevant, detailed and comprehensive. Detailed, thorough, and insightful discussion and sufficient relevant examples of how the unit reflects an understanding of specific Task 4.3: Techniques to address student behaviors Task 4.3: Classroom management procedures Task 4.3: Procedures to accommodating all learners Task 4.4: Community, district, school and classroom factors that impact student learning Task 4.4: Student characteristics that impact student learning Task 4.4: Pre-­‐
assessment data that impacts student learning Procedures to accommodate all learners are specified for both the delivery of instruction and independent practice and accommodations will positively impact the ability of all learners to achieve some of the lesson objectives. Score Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) relationship between development and learning, and the use of best practices for this content area is limited. learn, the relationship between development and learning, and the use of best practices for this content area is provided. [Connections to Willingham’s and Marzano’s books a minimum.] Sufficient and relevant examples of activities and teaching strategies implemented in the unit that elicit critical thinking, problem-­‐
solving, decision-­‐making, or drawing conclusions are provided. [Careful expression of how activities and teaching strategies will impact student learning and thinking required] Sufficient and relevant examples of instructional activities that actively engage students in learning and an adequate rationale describing how these activities promote active engagement are provided. Sufficient and relevant examples of instructional activities that are achievable, meaningful, and motivating, and provide an opportunity for all students in the classroom to learn are provided. theories of how students’ best learn, the relationship between development and learning, and the use of best practices for this content area is provided. Tasks 4.5: Cognitive procedures used during the unit Examples of activities and teaching strategies implemented in the unit that elicit critical thinking, problem-­‐solving, decision-­‐
making, or drawing conclusions are limited and/or not relevant. Task 4.5: Active engagement Examples of instructional activities that actively engage students in learning and/or the rationale describing how these activities promote active engagement are limited or not relevant. Tasks 4.5: Meaningful , motivating and appropriately challenging activities that enable all to learn Examples of instructional activities that are achievable, meaningful, and motivating, and provide an opportunity for all students in the classroom to learn are limited or not relevant. Score Activities and teaching strategies that elicit critical thinking, problem-­‐solving, decision-­‐making, and drawing conclusions and lead to deeper understanding of the content and/or enhanced development of skills included in the objectives are integrated throughout the unit. Activities that actively engage students in learning and lead to deeper understanding of the content and/or enhanced development of skills included in the objectives are integrated throughout the unit. Achievable, meaningful, and motivating activities that enable all students to develop a deeper understanding of the content and/or enhanced development of skills included in the objectives are integrated throughout the unit. TEACHING PROCESS 5 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 5 Prompt) Instructional Decision Making Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) Score Task 5.1: Description of and rationale for changes made while teaching Description of, and rationale for, changes made while teaching are severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic, accurate, and perceptive description of, and sufficient rationale for, changes made while teaching is provided. Detailed, accurate, and perceptive description of, and thorough rationale for, changes made while teaching is provided. Task 5.2: Discussion of impact, including evidence and examples Evidence and examples of impact on student learning of changes made are severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic, accurate, and insightful discussion of impact on student learning of any changes made is provided Detailed, accurate, and insightful discussion of impact on student learning of any changes made is provided. Task 5.3: Description and rationale for global changes to future lessons in the unit Description of, and explanation for, global changes is severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic, accurate, and insightful description of, and explanation for, global changes to future lessons is provided A detailed, accurate, and insightful description of, and explanation for, global changes to future lessons is provided. Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Task 5.4: Description and rationale for changes specific to individuals or groups in future lessons in the unit Description of, and explanation for, changes specific to individuals and/or groups is severely limited, irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or missing. Basic, accurate, and insightful description of, and explanation for, changes specific to individuals and/or groups are provided. Target (3) A detailed, accurate, and insightful description of, and explanation for, changes specific to individuals and/or groups are provided. Score TEACHING PROCESS 6 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 6 Prompt) Analysis and Interpretation of Student Learning and Performance Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Target (3) Score Post-­‐assessment data has not been added to the pre-­‐
assessment visual representations, results for each unit objective are not included, and/or the data are incomplete or contain errors in calculations. Task 6.1: Most Description or examples of successful learning students’ success in meeting objectives objectives were inaccurate, inappropriate, missing and/or not supported by data. Visual representations of data are complete, the results for each unit objective are included, and the calculations are correct. Visual representations of data are complete, results for each unit objective are included, the calculations are correct, and the data is presented in a way that facilitates analysis. Adequate and appropriate description and examples of students’ success in meeting objectives were provided with appropriate supporting data. Task 6.1: Least Description or examples of successful learning students’ difficulty in meeting objectives objectives were limited or missing and/or not supported by data. Adequate and appropriate description and examples of students’ difficulty in meeting objectives were provided with appropriate supporting data. Task 6.1: Successful adaptations Description of successful adaptations made throughout the unit is inappropriate, limited, or missing. Adequate and appropriate description of successful adaptations made throughout the unit is provided. Task 6.2: Summary of post-­‐
assessment data Summary is limited, inaccurate, missing, or does not address student learning in this unit. Task 6.2: Analysis of student performance Analysis and evaluation of student performance and their progress toward meeting lesson objectives in light of pre-­‐
assessment data are limited, missing, or inaccurate. Task 6.3: Interpretation of Data Interpretation of post-­‐
assessment data relative to student learning and performance is limited, not Basic and accurate summary of post-­‐assessment data relative to student learning in this unit is provided. [Learning in regards to objectives, standards, and alternative conceptions.] Basic and accurate analysis and evaluation of student performance and their progress toward meeting lesson objectives in light of pre-­‐assessment data are provided. Basic and relevant Interpretation of post-­‐
assessment data relative to student learning and Detailed and thorough description and examples of students’ success in meeting objectives were provided with highly relevant and comprehensive supporting data. Detailed and thorough description and examples of students’ difficulty in meeting objectives were provided with highly relevant and comprehensive supporting data. Detailed, appropriate, and insightful description of successful and varied adaptations made throughout the unit is provided. Detailed, accurate, and insightful summary of post-­‐
assessment data relative to student learning in this unit is provided. Task 6.1: Visual representation of post-­‐assessment results Detailed, accurate, and insightful analysis and evaluation of student performance and progress toward meeting lesson objectives in light of pre-­‐
assessment data are provided. Insightful and relevant Interpretation of post-­‐
assessment data relative to student learning and Indicator Unacceptable (1) relevant, or missing. Task 6.3: Interpretation of the data Implications of the relative to its implications for data for student students’ future learning and learning performance is limited, not relevant, or missing. Task 6.3: Interpretation of the data Implication of the relative to its implications for data for future future teaching is limited, not teaching relevant, or missing. Acceptable (2) Target (3) performance is provided. Basic and relevant Interpretation of the data relative to its implications for students’ future learning and performance is provided. Basic and relevant Interpretation of the data relative to its implications for future teaching is provided. performance is provided. Insightful and relevant Interpretation of its data relative to its implications for students’ future learning and performance is provided. Insightful and relevant Interpretation of its data relative to its implications for future teaching is provided. Score TEACHING PROCESS 7 RUBRIC (See Science Teacher Work Sample Rubric) (Task 7 Prompt) Reflection and Self-­‐Evaluation Indicator Unacceptable (1) Acceptable (2) Task 7.1: Summarization of unit taught. Task 7.1: Impact of teaching on student learning Summary of lessons is incomplete, inadequate, and/or missing. Discussion of the successes and challenges students experienced and the role of teaching skills in facilitating students’ learning is limited, not relevant, and/or missing. Basic and complete summary Detailed and thorough of lessons taught is provided. summary of lessons taught is provided. Basic and relevant discussion Detailed, insightful, and of the successes and thorough discussion of the challenges students successes and challenges experienced and the role of students experienced and the teaching skills in facilitating role of teaching skills in students’ learning is facilitating students’ learning provided. is provided. Task 7.1: Insight into the student learning/motivation process. Description and discussion of insights into the student learning/motivation process is severely limited, irrelevant, and/or missing. Discussion of teaching/leadership, style, classroom management, strengths, areas needing improvement, and commitment is severely limited, not relevant, and/or missing. Discussion of professional development needs and plan for improvement is severely limited, irrelevant, and/or missing. Basic description and discussion of insights into the student learning/motivation process is provided. Task 7.2: Knowledge of self as a teacher. Task 7.3: Professional development Basic and specific discussion of teaching/leadership style, classroom management, strengths, areas needing improvement, and commitment is provided. Basic and specific discussion of professional development needs and plan for improvement is provided. Target (3) Score Detailed, insightful, and thorough discussion of insights into the student learning/motivation process is provided. Detailed, insightful, and thorough discussion of teaching/leadership style, classroom management, strengths, areas needing improvement, and commitment is provided. Detailed, insightful, and thorough discussion of professional development needs and plan for improvement is provided. Also see the Rubric used for the Science Teacher Work Sample used previously. Return to: Prompt 1, Rubric 1, Prompt 2, Rubric 2, Prompt 3, Rubric 3, Prompt 4, Rubric 4, Prompt 5, Rubric 5, Prompt 6, Rubric 6, Prompt 7, Rubric 7
Science Work Sample Rubric: Scoring Guideline[1] Student Name: EIS 303 EIS 304 Bio 481 Semesters Reviewed: Reviewer Initials: STCH Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 1: Science Content -­‐ 1a) Understand and can successfully convey to students the major concepts, principles, theories, laws, and interrelationships of their fields of licensure and supporting fields as recommended by the National Science Teachers Association. (Tasks 1-­‐4) Student Learning Associated with Standard 1a (Task 6) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) The daily lesson plans, candidate generated materials, handouts, assessments, resources selected for use, etc. contain errors, do not accurately address the concepts associated with the standards, and/or do not demonstrate the candidate can successfully convey the concepts to their students. The daily lesson plans, assessment materials, handouts, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use, etc. are free from errors, are appropriately aligned with the standards as suggested by the candidate, and are presented in an manner appropriate for student learning. Target (8-­‐10) In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates through the development of the lessons that s/he is able to interconnect ideas in a unique way, bringing in additional resources as appropriate, to enhance the opportunity for students to learn the interrelationships among concepts, laws, principles, etc. The students did not demonstrate Either (A) the students The students clearly demonstrated learning connected to the demonstrated through the through the designed assessments standards identified by the designed assessments that they that they were able to gain a candidate and the candidate was were able to gain greater greater understanding of the unable to identify problems which understandings related to the concepts related to the standards led to this issue and to make standards identified as part of the identified as part of the unit and suggestions for appropriate unit OR (B) if limited or no increase were able to demonstrate how the changes in the future. in understanding occurred the concepts, principles, laws, etc. candidate was able to identify interconnected with those learned problems leading to this and make previously, with others taught appropriate suggestions for future during this unit, and/or with those modifications if this unit was to be taught in other courses. taught to a similar group of students in the future. STCH Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 1: Science Content -­‐ 1b) Understand and can successfully convey to students the unifying concepts of science delineated by the National Science Education Standards (NSES). (Tasks 1-­‐4 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Student Learning Associated with Standard 1b (Task 6 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Standard 2: Nature of Science -­‐ 2c) Engage students successfully in studies of the nature of science including, when possible, the critical analysis of false or doubtful assertions made in the name of science. (Tasks 1-­‐4 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) The daily lesson plans, candidate generated materials resources selected for use with the unit, etc. do not incorporate the unifying concepts as delineated by the NSES or are not useful in conveying those concepts to students. The daily lesson plans, assessment materials, handouts, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use, etc. do include information appropriate for students to learn the unifying concepts of science in a developmentally appropriate way. The daily lesson plans, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use with the unit, etc. do not incorporate the nature of science or do not do so in a way for the students to gain an understanding of the nature of science. For example, the teacher lectures about the nature of science without giving students an opportunity to participate in the process. The daily lesson plans, assessment materials, handouts, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use, etc. do provide students an opportunity to gain a greater appreciation for science as a way of knowing by participation in the process and/or examination of the process by others. Where appropriate, the candidate has included critical analysis of false or doubtful assertions. Target (8-­‐10) STCH In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates through the lesson plan(s) that s/he understands and can develop lessons that incorporate how the various concepts, principles, laws, etc. relate to the unifying concepts of science in an integral fashion. The students did not demonstrate Either (A) the students The students clearly demonstrated that they were able to connect demonstrated through the through the designed assessments the ideas presented in the lessons designed assessments that they that they were able to gain a to the unifying concepts of were able to gain greater greater understanding of how the science and/or were not able to understanding of the unifying concepts were connected with the discuss the role of the unifying concepts of science identified as unifying concepts of science and concepts of science. Also, the part of the unit OR (B) if limited or how these unifying concepts helped candidate was unable to identify no increase in understanding connect concepts from previous problems which led to this issue occurred the candidate was able to units of study, connect with and to make suggestions for identify problems leading to this concepts taught in other courses, appropriate changes in the future. and make appropriate suggestions or might connect with future units for future modifications if this unit of study. was to be taught to a similar group of students in the future. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can develop lessons and assessments that integrally link the nature of science to the way in which students learn the concepts, principles, laws, etc. In this way, the candidate provides students the opportunity to learn science within scientific ways of knowing and can assess more closely students' understanding of the nature of science. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Student Learning Associated with Standard 2c (Task 6– may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Standard 3: Inquiry -­‐ 3b) Engage students successfully in developmentally appropriate inquiries that require them to develop concepts and relationships from their observations, data, and inferences in a scientific manner. (Tasks 1-­‐4 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) The students did not demonstrate an understanding of the nature of science and/or were not able to discuss from an experiential level how science is similar to or different from other ways of knowing and the candidate was unable to provide suggestions for rectifying this in the future. Assessments that focus strictly on the process of science from a factual standpoint are included in this category. The daily lesson plans, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use with the unit, etc. do not allow students the opportunity to participate in the inquiry process and to demonstrate how the data they collected is integrally connected to the concepts, relationships, laws, etc. they are learning in this unit or have learned in previous units. Either (A) the students demonstrated through the designed assessments that they gained a greater understanding of the nature of science OR (B) if limited increase in understanding occurred the candidate was able to identify problems leading to this and make appropriate suggestions for future modifications if this unit was to be taught to a similar group of students in the future. The students clearly demonstrated through the designed assessments that they gained a greater understanding of the nature of science through (a) participation in the process, (b) examination of prior research and those who participated in the process, and, (c) where appropriate, through critical analysis of false or doubtful assertions. STCH The daily lesson plans, assessment materials, handouts, candidate generated materials, resources selected for use, etc. do include opportunities for students not only to participate in the process of science by engaging them in the inquiry process but also to show how their data, observations, and inferences are connected to the concepts, relationships, laws, etc. that they are studying. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can develop lessons and assessments that require students to use what they have learned through the inquiry process to develop concepts and relationships or a deeper understanding of concepts associated with the content standards that are listed as a integral part of this and/or previous units. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Student Learning Associated with Standard 3b (Tasks 6 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) The students were not able to connect data, observations, or inferences to the concepts, relationships, laws, principles, etc. that were part of the unit and/or were not able to use data, observations, or inferences to develop concepts or relationships. In addition, the candidate was unable to identify problems which led to this issue and to make suggestions for appropriate changes in the future. Target (8-­‐10) Either (A) the students demonstrated through the designed assessments that were able to connect observations, data, and/or inferences to scientific concepts and relationships OR (B) if limited or no increase in understanding occurred the candidate was able to identify problems leading to this and make appropriate suggestions for future modifications if this unit was to be taught to a similar group of students in the future. Standard 4: Issues -­‐ 4b) Engage The daily lesson plans, candidate The daily lesson plans, assessment students successfully in the analysis generated materials resources materials, handouts, candidate of problems, including selected for use with the unit, etc. generated materials, resources considerations of risks, costs, and do not engage students in selected for use, etc. require benefits of alternative solutions; analyzing problems (including students to engage in problem relating these to the knowledge, risks, costs, and benefits of analysis which involves goals and values of the students. alternative solutions), in regard to cost/benefit/risk analysis given the (Tasks 1-­‐4 – may or may not fit the students' knowledge, goals, and students' knowledge, goals, and 303/304/592 work sample) values. values. The students clearly demonstrated through the designed assessments that they were able to use observations, data, and/or inferences from experiments to either develop concepts and relationships or develop a deeper understanding of the concepts, principles, laws, etc. that are part of the unit. Student Learning Associated with Standard 4b (Tasks 6 – may or may not fit the 303/304/592 work sample) The students clearly demonstrated through the designed assessments that they were able to successfully examine the costs, benefits, and risks associated with solutions to a given problem by considering two or more perspectives of those who might be affected by the final decision. The students did not demonstrate that they could analyze a problem, including a cost/benefit analysis, given their own knowledge of the science, their goals, and their values. Either (A) the students demonstrated through the designed assessments that they could engage in problem analysis including a cost/risk/benefit analysis OR (B) if limited increase in understanding occurred the candidate was able to identify problems leading to this and make appropriate suggestions for future modifications if this unit was to be taught to a similar group of students in the future. STCH In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can develop lessons and assessments that challenge students to consider multiple perspectives as they analyze a problem and not limit their perspective to one point of view. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 5: General Skills of Teaching -­‐ 5a) Vary their teaching actions, strategies, and methods to promote the development of multiple student skills and levels of understanding. (Tasks 1, 4, 5, 6) STCH Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) The lesson plan(s) and the reflections on the lesson(s) did not demonstrate that the candidate varied the lesson(s) in order to accommodate variance in student skills or levels of understanding. The lesson plan(s) tended to use a few traditional lecture/lab strategies or methods only. If special accommodations were suggested in the lesson plan, no implementation of those accommodations was suggested. The lesson plan(s) and reflections clearly demonstrate that the candidate understood and was able to implement a variety of methods appropriate for students to meet the standards listed on the lesson plan(s). The teaching actions, strategies, and methods used took into consideration variance in possible student skill level or level of conceptual understanding. Standard 5: General Skills of Teaching -­‐ 5b) Successfully promote the learning of science by students with different abilities, needs, interests, and backgrounds. (Tasks 4, 5) The lesson plan(s) and the reflections on the lesson(s) did not demonstrate that the candidate was able to vary the lesson to take into account the different ability levels, needs, interests, or background of students of this age level. The lesson plan(s) and reflections clearly demonstrate that the candidate was able to vary the lesson to take into account the different ability levels, needs, interests, or background of students of this age level. Standard 5: General Skills of Teaching -­‐ 5c) Successfully organize and engage students in collaborative learning using different student group learning strategies. (Tasks 4, 5, 6) The lesson plan(s) and reflections either (A) do not include students engaged in group learning OR (B) do not implement teaching strategies, actions, or methods appropriate to make such group learning successful. The lesson plan(s) and reflections demonstrate that the candidate was able to develop successful opportunities for students to engage in different group learning strategies. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate clearly demonstrated that the teaching actions, strategies, and methods used were selected to accommodate the unique needs of the students in the given section of the course being taught. If an assessment demonstrated students lacked ability or understanding of a skill or concept, the candidate addressed this by reteaching using a different strategy or method to better accommodate his/her students. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate clearly demonstrated that s/he incorporated the needs, interests, backgrounds, and abilities of students in his/her classes in order to more precisely promote learning among his/her students. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate tailored the group learning taking into consideration individual differences in learning including the abilities, needs, interests, and backgrounds of his/her students. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 5: General Skills of Teaching -­‐ 5e) Understand and build effectively upon the prior beliefs, knowledge, experiences, and interests of students. (Tasks 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) STCH Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) The lesson plan(s) and reflections do not demonstrate that the lessons were built upon the prior beliefs, knowledge, experiences, or interests of students. The lesson plan(s) and reflections clearly demonstrate that the candidate considered the prior beliefs, knowledge, and experiences of students for the given developmental/age level. Standard 5: General Skills of Teaching -­‐ 5f) Create and maintain a psychologically and socially safe and supportive learning environment. (Tasks 1, 3, 4, 5, 6) The lesson plan(s) and reflections do not clearly demonstrate that the candidate was able to develop classroom environment that was "safe and supportive" for students of a variety of cultural, ethnic, socio-­‐economic backgrounds or for a variety of ability and skill levels. The lesson plan(s) and reflections clearly demonstrate that the candidate was able to design and implement lessons that were "safe and supportive" given the prior beliefs, knowledge, experiences, interests, values, and goals of the students in the class. The lesson plan(s) and reflections clearly demonstrate that the candidate identified the prior knowledge, beliefs, experiences, and interests of his/her students and used those to develop lesson tailored to his/her students but keeping in mind the goal of helping his/her students ultimately meet the specified standards. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate designed lessons to help students to be proactive in maintaining a safe and supportive learning environment by assisting one another in productive ways. Standard 6: Curriculum -­‐ 6a) Understand the curricular recommendations of the National Science Education Standards, and can identify, access, and/or create resources and activities for science education that are consistent with the standards. The implementation of the unit as demonstrated by the unit lesson plans and reflections do not demonstrate that the candidate can develop a unit of study that appropriately utilizes resources from a variety of sources to develop activities that help students meet the NSES content standards and the Illinois Learning Standards for Science. The implementation of the unit as demonstrated by the unit lesson plans and reflections demonstrate that the candidate can develop a unit of study that appropriately utilizes resources from a variety of sources to develop activities that help students meet the NSES content standards and the Illinois Learning Standards for Science. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he could modify existing resources to address the unique conditions of their class including student needs, abilities, background, ethnicity, etc., in order that his/her students may have the opportunity to meet the NSES content standards and the Illinois Learning Standards for Science. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 6: Curriculum -­‐ 6a) NSES curricular goals. Standard 6: Curriculum -­‐ 6a) Integration of content across curriculum including math. Standard 6: Curriculum -­‐ 6b) Plan and implement internally consistent units of study that address the diverse goals of the National Science Education Standards and the needs and abilities of students. Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) The goals, standards, objectives, and/or assessments selected for the unit do not span the categories of NSES standards as discussed in the met category. The selected goals, objectives, and standards for the unit of study must fit well together and allow students to meet a variety of standards across the NSES learning standards categories. Target (8-­‐10) STCH In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can align objectives and assessments with several standards in different NSES learning standards categories. In this way, a single concept can be viewed not only from the "knowledge" perspective but also from a variety of other perspectives, e.g. personal and social perspectives or nature of science. The connections are integral to student learning the concepts. The standards, objectives, The standards, objectives, In addition to the items listed in activities, and/or assessments do activities, and/or assessments met, the candidate demonstrates not demonstrate that the demonstrate that the candidate is that s/he can engage the students candidate is helping students helping students integrate the in making unique connections of integrate the concepts they are concepts they are learning to other the concepts across the curriculum learning to other science courses, science courses, math courses, and/or to their daily lives. math courses, non-­‐math or non-­‐math or science courses, or science courses, or life-­‐long life-­‐long learning. learning. The implementation of the unit as The implementation of the unit as In addition to the items listed in demonstrated by the unit lesson demonstrated by the unit lesson met, the candidate demonstrates plans and reflections do not plans and reflections demonstrate that s/he carefully considered the demonstrate that the candidate that the candidate can develop a needs and abilities of the students can develop a unit of study that is unit of study that is internally in his/her class when: (a) selecting internally consistent across goals, consistent across goals, standards, the level at which the standards standards, objectives, activities, objectives, activities, and should be addressed, (b) and assessments. assessments. developing objectives and assessments, and (c) designing the activities used to help students ultimately achieve the standards. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Standard 8: Assessment -­‐ 8a) Use multiple assessment tools and strategies to achieve important goals for instruction that are aligned with methods of instruction and the needs of students. (Task 3, 4, 5, 6) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) The lesson plans and reflections of the unit do not demonstrate that the candidate can use multiple assessment tools and strategies to achieve important goals for instruction that are aligned with methods of instruction and the needs of students. Standard 8: Assessment -­‐ 8b) Use The lesson plans and reflections the results of multiple assessments of the unit do not demonstrate to guide and modify instruction, the that the candidate can use the classroom environment, or the results of multiple assessments to assessment process. (Tasks 3, 4, 5, guide and modify instruction, the 6) classroom environment, or the assessment process. Standard 10: Professional Growth The lesson reflections do not -­‐ 10b) b. Reflect constantly upon demonstrate that the candidate is their teaching and identify ways able to reflect upon their teaching and means through which they may and identify ways they might grow professionally. (Tasks 5, 6, 7) improve upon individual lessons or lesson sets. The lesson plans and reflections of the unit demonstrate that the candidate can use multiple assessment tools and strategies to achieve important goals for instruction that are aligned with methods of instruction and the needs of students. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can utilize unique conditions of his/her class including student needs, abilities, background, ethnicity, etc., when designing the assessments. The lesson plans and reflections of the unit demonstrate that the candidate can use the results of multiple assessments to guide and modify instruction, the classroom environment, or the assessment process. The lesson reflections demonstrate that the candidate is able to reflect upon their teaching and identify ways and means through which they might improve upon a single lesson or a set of lessons. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he can use the assessments to reflect upon ways of improving the lesson for classes later that day or in future years. Teaching Standards Discussion The candidate clearly connects their lesson plan(s) and reflections to the ISBE and/or NSTA/NSES teaching standards as demonstrated in the List of Standards Charts. The candidate does not accurately connect their lesson plan(s) and reflections to the ISBE and/or NSTA or NSES teaching standards. STCH In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates that s/he reflects not only upon how a particular lesson or lessons might be altered but what professional development activities they might utilize in order to grow professionally and thus improve their teaching on a broader scale. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates a working understanding of the teaching standards through their lesson plan(s) and reflections, not simply through the designated chart. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Student Learning Standards Discussion and Charts Class Overview (Task 1) Daily Lesson Plans (Task 4) Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) The candidate is not able to accurately connect the Illinois Learning Standards for Science (ILS-­‐S) and/or the NSES Content Standards for Students to the lesson plans and assessments. The candidate is able to accurately connect the Illinois Learning Standards for Science (ILS-­‐S) and/or the NSES Content Standards for Students to the lesson plans and assessments as demonstrated in the List or Standards Chart. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates a working understanding of the State and National Student Learning standards through their lesson plan(s) and reflections and how they design their lessons to help students to meet those standards. The class overview is incomplete or provides insufficient information to someone not familiar with the group of students to get a sense of the group. The daily lesson plans are vague, incomplete, and/or inaccurate. The class overview is complete and provides sufficient information to someone not familiar with the group of students to get a sense of the group. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrates a clear appreciation for the strengths and weaknesses of each student and the impact of those on lesson development and sequencing. In addition to the items listed in met, the daily lesson plans provide a clear picture of how the candidate was planning to address the unique needs expressed about the group of students in the class. Detailed Self-­‐Reflection (Task 6, 7) The detailed self-­‐reflection for a lesson within the work sample is incomplete, vague, and/or inaccurate given the provided video. The daily lesson plans are complete, accurate, useful for teaching a lesson, and sufficiently detailed for a substitute to use them. The candidate provides a careful self-­‐reflection regarding the videotaped work sample lesson which addresses all requirements and provides clear insight into his/her teaching. STCH In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate's self reflection addresses not only issues within the given lesson but considers the issues discussed in a broader sense across their teaching experience. The self-­‐reflection addresses more broadly issues of need for the candidate's professional development. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Work Sample Data and Data Analysis (Task 3, 6) STCH Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) Any one of the following: The candidate does not provide sufficient data to allow the reviewer to accurately determine whether or not the claims for student learning are supported. The pre and post assessments are not sufficiently well linked to demonstrate learning. The data analysis is not based upon actual student data but upon observations that were not systematically collected. The work sample assessment items were developed in order to allow comparison of student understanding prior to, during, and after the time period of instruction. The assessments were designed in such a manner to allow clear comparisons at different stages in the learning. Also, the data analysis was based upon actual student data. In addition to the items listed in met, the candidate demonstrated that s/he was able to use his/her knowledge of the process of science to engage in systematic examination of his/her students' learning and then use the results to make recommendations for changes in his/her teaching, for types of professional development opportunities that would enhance his/her teaching, and for addressing specific students' learning needs. Paper is not written well; it contains excessive errors in spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar. Common errors include incomplete and run-­‐on sentences, sentence fragments, comma splices, noun/pronoun disagreement, incorrect word forms, use of expletives, lack of parallelism, incomplete paragraphing, end of sentence prepositions, etc. Those parts of the work sample written in prose are well-­‐written; they contain appropriate paragraphing, complete sentences, and no or few errors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Those parts of the work sample written in prose are exceptionally well written; they contain no mechanical, spelling, or grammatical errors and include a variety of sentence structures. Those parts of the work sample that are written in prose lack logical organization and is difficult to follow. Those parts of the work sample that are written in prose are sufficiently organized, cohesive, and coherent within each section. The paper does follow APA style recommendations. Mechanics of the Work Sample and Unit/Lesson Plans
Spelling and Grammar Content and Style Those parts of the work sample that are written in prose are well-­‐
organized, cohesive, and coherent throughout the paper. Scoring Guidelines (NSTA Standards and Other Criteria) Citations and Bibliography Not Met (0-­‐3) Met (4-­‐7) Target (8-­‐10) Citations are incomplete, inconsistently used in the body of the text. Citations and bibliographic entries do not conform to APA style. Sources were not sufficient in number or quality. In addition to the items listed in met, the form of citations and bibliographic entry complies with APA guidelines and the sources allow for a variety of perspectives as is appropriate for the assignment. In addition to the items included in met, the candidate provides additional information to assist the reviewer in quickly locating items that are connected to one another but located in different parts of the packet. Titles, Headings and Subheadings, Figures, etc. The paper does not include an appropriate title, appropriate titles for figures, graphs, etc. All references are included in both the text (citations) and in the bibliography. Form of citations and bibliographic entry generally complies with APA guidelines. Adequate numbers of sources are included and were obtained from peer reviewed journals, books, or other reputable sources. The paper does include an appropriate title, appropriate titles for figures, graphs, etc. Completeness of Work One or more of the required components of the work sample are not present or are not complete. All required components for the work sample are complete. All components are clearly labeled and appropriately referenced. Overall Comments STCH The title of the paper, headings and subheadings, and titles of figures etc., are not only appropriate but contribute significantly to the reader's understanding of the project. [1] If the assignment is used for a course grade you may convert the score values as follows to determine the percent grade: 0=0; 1=50; 2=60; 3=68; 4=73; 5=78; 6=83; 7=88; 8=93; 9=98; 10=