Standard 1:

Meeting descriptor 1.1, pages 4-10 of Evidence 1 – Math PPT use language scaffolding with sentence frames in the whiteboard quiz as a strategy to improve the learning of the English language learners (ELL). On pg. 12, the pre-test informs the teacher of where each student is in the learning process at the beginning of the unit to better plan subsequent lessons. The use of whiteboard quizzes (page 4-10) provides formative data to inform planning of lessons. Evidence 3 – English PPT, pages 9-12 use a literacy strategy, pre-teaching the vocabulary, to help improve the reading comprehension of the students. 

Further addressing descriptor 1.1, I draw from Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and Erickson’s stages of psychosocial development as background knowledge. The evidence provided for this task is from a Grade 4 classroom, the industry vs. inferiority stage, where it is crucial to scaffold student learning adequately so they don’t develop self-esteem issues. Additionally, this is the concrete operational stage where students need concrete situations and examples before they can consider hypothetical or abstract concepts.

In Task 2, Evidence 1 – Math PPT, page 21 shows the concrete stage of this math task. Students use base 10 blocks to divide the given amount and make equal groups. This is part of the Concrete Pictorial Abstract (CPA) approach to mathematics, which aligns with Piaget’s stages. The CPA approach is used here to support the development of industry in the students, aligning with Erickson’s theory.

I also engage the social aspects of the students within Task 2, Evidence 1 – Math PPT by providing different ways to interact with the content. For example, on pages 3-11, the students work independently to review previous math concepts. However, later on in the lesson on page 16, they work as a “Number Talk” group to tackle new math concepts. This is based on Vygotsky’s social learning theories, giving students the opportunity to explore ideas socially through discussion and collaboration on a new math problem, construct their own meanings, and then receive feedback from the teacher.

These two math and English units use research and collegial advice and apply knowledge of the content and teaching strategies of the teaching area (descriptor 1.2). Evidence 3 contains images of an Oxford book, Why We Recycle, that demonstrates The Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), a second language acquisition method. Students learn English while they are learning a topic relevant to their lives and the real world. The Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract (CPA) approach, shown in pages 21 and 27 of Evidence 1, introduces students to long division with a two-digit divisor. Students use concrete manipulatives, base ten blocks, before moving into pictorial representations of the math concepts, and then finally writing abstract equations and expressions using only numbers and symbols. 

The language scaffolds from Evidence 1, page 4-10 also address the diverse linguistic backgrounds of the students (descriptor 1.3). Both Evidence 1 and Evidence 3 use large images as visual scaffolds for reading comprehension (which also meets descriptor 1.1 as a teaching strategy used to improve student learning). What is not able to be shared as evidence is the responsiveness to diverse cultural backgrounds. For example, Japanese students usually get out of their seats or shout out without raising their hand. Non-Japanese teachers have to be aware that these are culturally accepted behaviors in the Japanese classroom instead of perceiving them as disrespectful. 

For descriptor 1.3, it’s important to note that all the evidence provided here is within a context of non-native English speakers. The keywords, like dividend, are highlighted with different colors on page 4. There are sentence frames, an EAL language scaffold, provided to students on pages 5-10.

Task 2, Evidence 1 – Math PPT provides visual supports for classroom instructions, like the textbook on page 15 or math notebook on page 33. There are also visual supports for math problems, like the images of money on pages 18-20, 23-26, and 29-31. Visual supports enhance communication and not only help students from diverse linguistic backgrounds, but also students with autism, auditory processing difficulties, ADHD, and other additional needs. This is why I use PPTs for all of my lessons in every subject.

Task 2, Evidence 1 – Math PPT also provides an opportunity to address cultural diversity. The English math textbook featured on page 15 is an American textbook because there are not many English academic texts in Japan. On page 18, you can see this presents an issue as the math problem uses American money. I resolve this by providing a rich context where students imagine themselves traveling to America. We can introduce the problem with a short, but engaging discussion about where we would like to travel if we went to America. That makes the math problem more meaningful, especially since some students have traveled to America or know people who have and can connect the relevance of these math skills to their real life.

It’s important to note that many (if not most) teachers never have never had the opportunity to work in contexts where their language and culture is the minority. International teachers, however, are very experienced at this. All evidence provided here is from a bilingual school, which means the learning context for all of the evidence in this portfolio is the product of a diverse environment. Unlike an international school, bilingual schools require the use of more than one academic language.