Week 11 - Mini Lesson 1

Candidate’s Name: Shulamith Elias

Grade Level: 3rd

Title of the lesson: Water Pollution

Length of the lesson: 45 Minutes

Central focus ●     what do you want your students to learn? Students will learn about the effects that water pollution has on the environment. ●     what are the important understandings and core concepts you want students to develop within the learning segment? Students will develop skills required to decipher an expository text.

Knowledge of students to inform teaching ●     What do students know, what can they do, what are they learning to do? Students are fluent readers, but are new to expository texts. ●     What do you know about your students’ everyday experiences, cultural backgrounds and practices, and interests?  Students can read and write independently and work well in groups. There is a group of ELL students that are struggling somewhat in comparison to their peers.

Common Core State Standards CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.3.3 Describe the relationship between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text, using language that pertains to time, sequence, and cause/effect.

Support literacy development through language (academic language) ●     Students will analyze the expository text ●     Students will discuss their understandings using content specific vocabulary ●     Students will rewrite their information into the corresponding graphs

Learning Objectives Students will analyze the expository text with help from the teacher Students will understand cause and effect as presented in the text Students will demonstrate their understandings using supporting materials.

Formal and informal assessment ●     Students will not be formally assessed at this early stage. They will however be informally assessed throughout the lesson, as I will check for participation and understanding.

Instructional procedure: I will introduce the topic by passing around various water bottles with dirty water inside. I will engage the students in a discussion regarding whether the water is “good” or “bad” – why or why not would they want to drink it? I will then explain that dirty water is actually a real problem facing the world today. Using the smartboard, I will load an article about Water Pollution from eschooltoday.com. We will read the article together, outloud. I will stop frequently to check for understanding. Once the reading is complete, I will introduce the students to the Cause and Effect graphic organized. We will do one sample together as a class. The remaining two samples will be done by the students in groups. Students will be required to reference the text when writing. Before dismissing the class, we will review the chart together. (ELLS will have the option of drawing their responses to demonstrate understanding instead of writing. ELL groups will also be able to make use of the teacher’s assistant to review the text an extra time, and ensure complete understanding.)

Instructional resources and materials used to engage students in learning. Smartboard, http://eschooltoday.com/pollution/water-pollution/effects-of-water-pollution.html

Reflection ●     I believe that my instruction supported learning for the whole class including the students who need great support or challenge. ●     What changes would you make to support better student learning of the central focus? I would plan additional lessons that require similar skills, to further build on the concepts presented. ●     Why do you think these changes would improve student learning? I think this would help concretize the students’ knowledge, since practice is key to understanding and using new skills.

Week 10 - Assignment 4

Candidate’s Name: Shulamith Elias

Grade Level: Five

Title of the lesson: Analyzing Texts: Putting Thoughts on Paper

Length of the lesson: 45 Minutes

Central focus ●    Students will learn how to write about a complex text.

Knowledge of students to inform teaching (prior knowledge/prerequisite skills and personal/cultural/community assets) ●     Students are familiar with what they read in class, and can hold group discussions. They are now learning how to write about the text. ●     Aside from a group of ELLS who receive specialized instruction, most students can work independently.

Common Core State Standards ●     ELA.W.5.2b- Develop the topic with facts definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information related to the topic. ●     ELA.W.5.9b- Apply grade 5 reading standards to a text

Support literacy development through language ●     Students will analyze, interpret, and retell what they've read before beginning to write. ●     Students will use evidence from the text to support their writing.

Learning objectives ●     Students will write about a complex text, using evidence from the text to support their writing. Students will understand the author's point of view.

Formal and informal assessment Formal: Teacher will assess student work. Informal: Teacher will gage the students' participation / comprehension throughout the lesson.

Instructional procedure: Students complete their reading in groups and discuss their findings together. The teacher gives the students a specific question to focus on. Then, using the whiteboard, the teacher models how to present their thoughts through writing. Students then divide up, and work individually to answer the questions. Students are assessed using the same set of comprehension questions, based on the text. ELLs complete the assessments in small groups, with help from the teacher.

Instructional resources and materials used to engage students in learning. Text, Whiteboard

Reflection ●   I think this is a great example of a well-balance lesson. It is sufficiently stimulating for all students, yet does not overwhelm or ignore the needs of the diverse learners within the class.

Week 9 - DIBELS & QRI-5

About QRI-5:

QRI-5 is used as an informal assessment tool in a 1:1 setting. QRI-5 focuses on two key principles. The first is assessing how students identify words and what strategies the student employs. The second is identifying the reasons and background behind what causes a student to struggle with a word, and overall comprehension.

In order to do so, the QRI-5 contains words lists and passages. The word lists are not longer than 20 words each, and are used to both time reading speed and assess reading accuracy. The lists contain both low and high frequency words. 

The QRI-5 passages can be read out loud and quietly, and are used for a number of tasks. They can be applied to asses the student's comprehension in both oral and silent reading, as well as the student's skills with regard to in-context word identification strategies, listening level, retelling skills, look-back capabilities, think-alouds, questioning, and ability to read different text genres.

About DIBELS:

DIBLES focuses primarily on the main components, or "big ideas" of early reading. These big ideas are phonemic awareness, accuracy and fluency, vocabulary, alphabetic principle and comprehensions. DIBELS are a series of short assessments that measure the students in these areas. DIBELS is geared for young children who are just beginning to read. Additionally, DIBELS are aligned with common core standards, and are used to monitor student progress throughout the year. Ultimately, DIBELS should be used to screen students thrice yearly using the benchmark evaluation to determine whether or not additional intervention is needed, and whether the instruction is meeting success.

Comparison:

Differences - QRI-5 is geared for students K-12, whereas DIBELS ends at grade six. QRI-5 assesses students reading strategies, whereas DIBELS focuses on the "big ideas" instead. Additionally, DIBELS is meant to be used with all early readers, whereas QRI-5 is recommended for assessing individual students.

Similarities - Both DIBELS and QRI-5 are tools used by educators to identify student reading levels, plan interventions, and inform instruction. Both tools have been proven to be reliable, and while they differ in their structure and content, both are effective.

Week 7 - Assignment 5

Print-Awareness 

Assessment Type: Guided questions as listed in the module
Results: Perfect

Phonemic Awareness

Assessment Type: Student counted the words in the following sentence using manipulatives
"She caught many fish and ate them for supper"
Results: 9 /10

Phonics

Assessment Type: Student read the following words out-loud switching the letters
bin / bun / bug / tug / tub / tube
Results: At first student said "I don't know what that word (bin) is" I told her to read it as a sound, and not to focus on the meaning. Student then sounded out the word, and then said "oh! That's bin!" Student proceeded to read the remaining words correctly.

Fluency

Assessment Type: Student read a passage out loud
Results: The student's WCPM was on target for her grade level. However, she often slurred words together, didn't pause in the correct spots, and / or read and then reread until the word was sounded out correctly, for instance "start - starteeed - started"

Interventions:

The following websites provide story book recordings and a range of phonemic awareness and phonics related activities.I think that my student would benefit from partaking in these activities on a regular basis, with a special focus on pacing her words, identifying the number of words in a spoken sentence (such as in story book recordings etc.), and general phonics review.http://www.abcya.com/http://www.meegenius.com/http://www.readwritethink.org/search/?resource_type=16&type=32

Week 6 Assignment

http://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cbehQD6tNz

Week 5 Assignment

QRI-5 Evaluation:

Assignments 1-3: 

The test administrator had Mary read the word lists from Level I, II, and III, until it was determined that the Level II list was most appropriate for her current reading level. Within this parameter, the examiner chose to have Mary read an expository passage from Level II which would be challenging for Mary without causing undue frustration.The following assessments relate to this passage, as determined by Mary's current reading level.

Part I: Assessment of Prior Knowledge
Mary answered one out of three questions on a basic level.

Score: 1/12

Part II: Oral Reading Miscue Analysis

Score: 46 WPM - 43 WCPM

Oral Reading Prosody Scale: 3

Part III: Assessment of Comprehension through Unaided Recall

Mary demonstrated strong recall capabilities and was able to elaborate when prompted.

Strengths & Needs: 

Mary is clearly on Level II, as the Level III reading list caused her tremendous frustration. While she was able to read the Level II list comfortably, she demonstrated difficulty in expressing prior recall. Mary's WPM / WCPM are also on target with Level II as there is room for improvement in terms of her ability to maintain her focus by holding the place and read smoothly with less prompting.

Week 4 - Assignment 3

http://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cbnq3c62Bz