Standard 2:
Know the content and how to teach it
Task 2, Evidence 1 - Math PPT.pdfTask 2, Evidence 2 - Math Unit Plan.pdfTask 2, Evidence 3 - English PPT.pdfEvidence 1 - Unit Plan.pdfEvidence 2 - T4W Guide.pdfEvidence 3 - Unit PPT.pdfDescriptor 2.2
Both Task 2, Evidence 1 and Task 2, Evidence 3 demonstrate how the content is organized into coherent, well-sequenced learning programs (descriptor 2.2). Evidence 1 involves a review of previously learned content, a pre-test, sharing the lesson’s goals, a collaborative learning activity exploring and negotiating new content, guided practice, and ends with independent practice. Evidence 3 involves previewing new content, sharing the lesson’s goals, pre-teaching vocabulary, collaborative language practice, a shared reading activity, a review and formative assessment of the new content, then independent practice.
Descriptor 2.2
Further meeting descriptor 2.2, this unit was planned using the Understanding by Design (UbD) approach, which has 3 stages. Task 1, Evidence 1 – Unit Plan demonstrates that teachers begin Stage 1 of planning by determining the conceptual understandings, transferrable skills, learning goals, and essential questions of the unit. In Stage 2, teachers plan the tasks that will provide evidence for meeting the leaning goals in Stage 1. Stage 3 is the most specific stage where teachers detail each lesson. This is backwards planning approach also aligns with descriptor 3.1 as it ensures lessons are planned after learning goals are set, making the content of the lesson more effective for reaching those goals. Students are also more engaged with their learning process because their goals are front and center.
The structure of the unit is based around the Talk for Writing (T4W) program and the Oxford Read and Discover books used in our English curriculum. Specifically, regarding descriptor 2.2, the Talk for Writing program provides a structure that can be flexibly applied to academic content. The structure is defined in 3 stages: imitation, innovation, and invention. After introducing the unit and exploring models of opinion writing, I planned six lessons for imitation, two lessons for innovation, and two lessons for invention, as can be seen in Task 1, Evidence 1. The first stage of this writing program is the longest to allow teachers maximum modeling and scaffolding time before students reach the independent assessment task. The independent assessment task stage is invention. These stages are described in more detail throughout Task 1, Evidence 2 – T4W Guide.
Descriptor 2.3
Descriptor 2.3 is met through the use of whiteboard quizzes as formative assessment, the pre-test, and the Understanding by Design unit planner. Both Task 2, Evidence 1 and Task 2, Evidence 3 demonstrate the use of whiteboard quizzes on page 16. Evidence 1 shows the pre-test on page 12, which was then use to identify students who may need extra support and students who may need extra challenges. Task 2, Evidence 2 describes assessment in detail in Stage 2.
Descriptor 2.5
A math lesson and English lesson were chosen as Task 2, Evidence 1 and Task 2, Evidence 3 to demonstrate descriptor 2.5. In Task 2, Evidence 3, page 15 shows one literacy approach to reading. To keep students engaged and formatively asses the fluency, students repeat the last word the teacher reads after a clap. The teacher reads most of the early chapters to model pronunciation and fluency as most of the students are ELLs. Later chapters will pivot to shared reading strategies. Additionally, page 25 encourages students to scan the text for answers by requiring them to underline answers. Evidence 1 uses numeracy strategies like CPA to deepen conceptual understanding of the processes involved in algorithmic division. The blocks also help students make sense of and practice dividing quantities into groups (pages 20-21, 27).
Descriptor 2.6
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is integrated with the use of PPTs that contain engaging media in every lesson (descriptor 2.6). Projectors are also used in class to aid in modeling work in the textbook or notebook. Google Classroom is referenced on page 13 of Task 2, Evidence 1 as an ICT resource for support, review, and further independent learning.
Task 2, Additional Evidence 8 - Descriptor 1.4, 2.4.pdfTask 2, Additional Evidence 5 - Descriptor 1.4, 2.4.pdfTask 2, Additional Evidence 4 - Descriptor 1.4, 2.4.pdfDescriptor 2.4
The Stronger Smarter Institute (Task 2, Additional Evidence 4) also contributed to my broad knowledge of, understanding of and respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories, cultures and languages. Specifically, the institute explained how to support positive student identity for students from Indigenous Australian backgrounds.
Non-Indigenous educators often attempt to include Indigenous Australian artefacts in a merely decorative way by hanging Indigenous art throughout the school. Although this is part of the strategy, stopping there is obvious tokenism. This goal is better accomplished by incorporating Indigenous Australian perspectives and artefacts into the curriculum. For example, ensuring that there are books about Indigenous Australian culture in the classroom and using them in lessons.
Another effective way to build positive student identities is to collaborate with local leaders from Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander backgrounds. This might mean having an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Education Assistant in the classroom. It might also mean including elders in the school in some other way. When I gain a teaching position in an Australian school, I intend to ask about how they include the local community in their classrooms.
More evidence of how this online learning module broadened my teaching knowledge is given in Task 2, Additional Evidence 5 and Task 2, Additional Evidence 8.