You are on page 1of 1

Rationale

The Evidence of Student Learning required me to design a series of lessons that meets the
developmental needs of all learners in the group receiving instruction. Based on knowledge of
content, students, community and curriculum goals, I was expected to plan instruction and design
a meaningful assessment tool. The assignment required three lessons in which pre assessment
data, formative assessment data and summative assessment data was used to monitor and
document student progress in order to adjust instruction. This connects to CEC standards 3
(Curricular Content Knowledge), 4 (Assessment) and 5 (Instructional Planning and Strategies).

I gained knowledge of curricular content (CEC standard 3) when conducting the


ESL assignment. This knowledge was demonstrated while completing Part C (Instruction)
and Part D (Analysis and Instructional Decision-Making). In Part C, I had to share objectives
of each lesson with student-friendly terms to ensure that students understand their expectations
for the achievement of the selected MCCRS and Essential Skills and Knowledge. Then, in Part
D, I had to describe how student achievement of selected MCCRS and Essential Skills and
Knowledge was determined.

I also demonstrated my knowledge of assessment strategies (CEC standard 4) while


completing this assignment as well. This knowledge was demonstrated within Part B
(Assessment Plan), Part C (Instruction) and Part D (Analysis and Instructional Decision-
Making). When completing part B I had to develop a summative unit assessment aligned with
the selected MCCRS and Essential Skills and Knowledge. I had to develop and use a scoring tool
that would assess student learning. Then, in Part C, I had to use formative assessments to check
for understanding. Lastly, in part D, I had to compute the percentage of change from pre to post
assessments in order to measure student growth.

Finally, I demonstrated my knowledge of instructional planning and strategies


(CEC Standard 5) when completing Part C (Instruction) and Part D (Analysis and
Instructional Decision-Making). When completing Part C, I had to analyze pre-assessment data
to ensure that my objectives for each day were appropriate and revise if necessary. I had to
introduce new knowledge/content and model new skills. I also had to allow opportunities for
guided practice and then independent practice with feedback. I had to be sure to give descriptive,
clear feedback to students as well as administer appropriate assessments. Lastly, in Part D, I had
to identify students who did not master the lesson objectives and implement appropriate
interventions to improve subsequent instruction.

The students in the small group that received this instruction were positively affected by
my mastery of the standards. By the end of the three lessons, all students showed progress
toward the goal of counting to 100. I believe this progress was a result of the effective
instructional strategies I used that met the individual students needs. I became more confident in
creating assessments and using the data to improve and modify instruction so that ALL students
could make growth.