North Coast Beginning Teacher Program



|UCLA Extension University Induction Clear Credential Program |

|STUDENT WORK ANALYSIS - INQUIRY III |

After administering an assessment, analyze the data produced by your entire focus class. Describe your criteria used for grading, and then list the first names of students who fall into each of the five categories.

|ELA Content Standard: W.4.1a. b. d. |

|1. Write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons and information. |

|a. Introduce a topic or text clearly, state an opinion, and create an organizational structure in which related ideas are grouped to support the writer’s purpose. |

|b. Provide reasons that are supported with facts and details. |

|d. Provide a concluding statement… related to the opinion presented. |

|Assessment: On Demand Opinion Writing |

| |

|In creating this rubric, I have taken ideas form the 2nd through 5th grade writing checklists published in the following text (I have included photographs of those checklists at the end of this document so it|

|could be seen how I have slightly altered them to suit my students and the purposes of this assignment.): |

|Calkins, Lucy. (2013). Writing Pathways: Performance Assessments and Learning Progressions. Heinemann. Portsmouth, NH. (pp. 92-95). |

| |

|The On Demand Writing Prompt for the Pre-Assessment is posted at the end of this document as well. The writing prompts are almost identical to the Calkins’ book (p. 86), but they are slightly modified to meet|

|my classes needs. |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

Not At Standard At Standard

|Far Below Basic |Below Basic |Basic |Proficient |Advanced |

|Describe Criteria |Describe Criteria |Describe Criteria |Describe Criteria |Describe Criteria |

| | | | | |

|Overall: The writer writes an opinion about|Overall: The writer writes an opinion |Overall: The writer makes a claim about a |Overall: The writer makes a claim about a |Overall: The writer makes a claim about|

|a topic or text but gives no reasons. |about a topic or text and gives at least |topic or text and tries to help readers |topic or text and tries to support the |a topic or text and supports the claim |

| |one reason. There is little attempt to |understand at least one reason. The |claim with more than one reason and with |with more than two reasons and with |

| |help the reader understand the reasons and|reason(s) have at least one supportive |more than one supportive detail for each |more than two supportive details for |

| |there are no supportive details. |detail. |reason, and the supportive reasons vary a |each reason with a variety of evidence |

| | | |bit (For example, at least a fact and an |(facts, anecdotes, quotes, paraphrases,|

| | | |anecdote). |and examples). |

| | | | | |

| | | | |Organization: Information and related |

| |Organization: Information and related | |Organization: Information and related |ideas are grouped into paragraphs. |

| |ideas are grouped together. Paragraph |Organization: Information and related |ideas are grouped into paragraphs. | |

|Organization: Information and related ideas|structures are missing. |ideas are grouped into paragraphs. | |The introduction includes the context |

|are not grouped together. | | | |and the claim with a brief mention of |

| |The introduction includes an idea for the | |The introduction includes the context and |the reasons. |

| |paper, but it is not an opinion or claim. | |the claim. | |

| | |The introduction includes the claim. | |Body paragraphs have reasons stated as |

|The introduction has no central idea, |Body paragraphs have no topic sentences. | | |topic sentences and relevant supportive|

|opinion, or claim for the paper, | | |Body paragraphs have reasons stated as |details. The reasons relate to the |

| | | |topic sentences and relevant supportive |claim. The supportive details relate to|

| | |Body paragraphs have topic sentences. The |details. Most of the reasons relate to the|the reasons. |

|No body paragraphs. | |topic sentences don’t fit logically with |claim. Most of the supportive details | |

| | |the claim. Most of the supportive details |relate to the reasons. |Elaboration: |

| | |relate to the topic sentences. | | |

| | | |Elaboration: |At least three reasons are given to |

| |Elaboration: | | |support the claim. |

| | |Elaboration: |At least two reasons are given to support | |

| |At least one attempt is made to explain | |the claim. |The reasons supporting the claim are |

| |the claim. |At least one reason is given to support | |clearly chosen to convince the reader |

| | |the claim. | |because they relate to the claim and |

|Elaboration: | | |The reasons supporting the claim are |the importance is fully explained. |

| |The reasons supporting the claim do not | |clearly chosen to convince the reader | |

|No reason is given to support the claim. |seem to be chosen to convince the reader |The reasons supporting the claim are |because they relate to the claim and |The reasons are parallel and do not |

| |but only to inform. |chosen to convince the reader because they|the importance is mentioned. |overlap. |

| | |relate to the claim. | | |

| | | | |No errors in factual detail and no |

| | | | |exaggerations. |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | |No errors in factual detail and no |Credit is always given to authors and |

| | | |exaggerations. |speakers when their ideas are |

| | | | |referenced. |

| |No more than two errors in factual details|No more than one error in factual details | | |

| |and no more than two exaggerations. |and no more than one exaggeration. | |The Supporting Details for each reason |

| | | |Credit is almost always given to authors |are explained and vary in that they |

| |Credit is not given to authors and |Credit is given at least once to authors |and speakers when their ideas are |include at least 3 of the following: |

| |speakers when their ideas are referenced. |and speakers when their ideas are |referenced. |facts, examples, quotes, paraphrases, |

| | |referenced. | |and anecdotes. |

| |The Supporting Details for each reason are| |The Supporting Details for each reason are| |

|Three or more errors in factual details and|present but are not explained and not |The Supporting Details for each reason are|explained and vary with two of the | |

|three or more exaggerations. |varied. |present and explained, but the types of |following: facts, examples, quotes, | |

| | |details do not vary. |paraphrases, and anecdotes including | |

| | | |micro-stories. | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

|The Supporting Details are missing for the | | | | |

|most part. | | | | |

|List Students |List Students |List Students |List Students |List Students |

| | | | | |

| |For elaboration, Helena (Focus student) |Overall and Organization, Helena (Focus | | |

| |fits here. |student) fits here. | | |

| | | | | |

| | |Overall and Organization, Maria fits here.| | |

| |For elaboration, | | | |

| |Maria fits here. |For elaboration, overall, and | | |

| | |organization, | | |

| | |Antonio fits here. | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | |For elaboration, overall, and | | |

| | |organization, Anita is between Basic and | | |

| | |Proficient. | | |

| | | | | |

In each column below, describe how you will move each of your groups of students (including advanced students) forward to the next level of proficiency. Use your Ensuring Universal Access information to identify strategies to use with your three groups who are Not At Standard.

|Far Below Basic |Below Basic |Basic |Proficient |Advanced |

|Intensive Group |Strategic Group |Benchmark Group | | |

| | | | | |

| |Elaboration |Elaboration |Strategies for Anita and Antonio to Move | |

| | | |Up a Level | |

| |Helena and Maria fit here in terms of |Antonio and Anita fit here in terms of | | |

| |elaboration. |elaboration. |1. Differentiation in Content: Anita and | |

| | | |Antonio are reading at a higher level than| |

| |1. Reasons should be aligned with the |1. Reasons supported the claim, but credit|Maria and Helena. Hence, I will have | |

| |claim and support the claim. |was not given regularly for the source of |students in homogenous reading groups at | |

| | |their ideas. |times with differentiated texts from | |

| |2. The supportive reasons should not be | |. | |

| |exaggerated. |2. Anita explained the importance of the | | |

| | |evidence with lots of details. She is |2. Differentiation in Process: When | |

| |Strategies to Move Students Up a Level |ready to offer up a variety of evidence. |articles are the same, I will have Anita | |

| | | |and Antonio read aloud as a pair while I | |

| |1. Per the Resource Specialist I consult | |read with Maria and Helena as a pair. In | |

| |in the Special Education Class, I will ask|Organization |the latter group, more time needs to be | |

| |Helena and Maria to write one sentence per| |spent on using context for vocabulary and | |

| |lined post-it. The students can then line |1. Helena and Mia should elaborate on |for reading comprehension checks. | |

| |up their post-its in order using an |their claim, expand it, and make it more | | |

| |argument graphic organizer. For Helena and|complete. |2. Differentiation in Product: Anita and | |

| |Maria who generally need assistance in | |Antonio may achieve the writing benchmarks| |

| |elaborating and adding details, I can move|2. Mia and Helena should provide a context|earlier, so I will have extensions ready | |

| |certain post-its down the organizer, apply|for the argument in the introduction. |for them. I will ask them to develop a | |

| |two blank post-its in the empty space, and| |counterargument section for their paper or| |

| |ask them to write two more details, facts,|3. Antonio and Anita should cite sources |poster. | |

| |quotes, paraphrases, or explanations in |when they are explaining their data. | | |

| |that spot. | | | |

| | |4. Antonio and Anita should move on to | | |

| |2. I will need to provide more class time|another paragraph if their data shifts | | |

| |in writing for Maria and especially for |dramatically. | | |

| |Helena, and I will increase the amount of | | | |

| |time I sit with them. I will ask them |5. Antonio should write about the | | |

| |questions about certain parts of their |importance of his evidence. | | |

| |paper asking them for elaboration. | | | |

| | |Strategies to Move Students Up a Level | | |

| |3. Helena as my focus student and Maria | | | |

| |will need more visual aids to help them |1. For all students, students may use | | |

| |elaborate. Hence, I will be sure to |IPads to check spelling quickly. This is | | |

| |provide more visuals for the areas where |not on the rubric, but Anita has too many | | |

| |they are stuck, such as educational videos|misspellings, and Helena gets stuck in her| | |

| |or songs. I will also see if I can |writing process if she is concerned about | | |

| |incorporate manipulatives or if I can |a misspelling. So, this will help them to | | |

| |encourage them to kinesthetically imagine |move on and remain focused on content. | | |

| |experiences. | | | |

| | |2. For all students, to help with the | | |

| |4. I will be chunking the learning of this|organization of ideas as they read | | |

| |argument unit, and I check more often for |multiple texts, I will have students | | |

| |verbal understanding when I teach lesson. |collect data using post-it notes and | | |

| |I will use Spencer Kagan strategies of |sources and to put the post-it notes on a | | |

| |Timed Pair Shares and Rally Robins in |pros and cons chart. In this way, they can| | |

| |order to encourage whole class engagement,|modify ideas and claims easily as they | | |

| |and I will listen in as a way to assess |read about issues. They will use a pros | | |

| |understanding. |and cons chart before using the argument | | |

| | |graphic organizer. | | |

| |5. I will provide lesson notes. As I work | | | |

| |with students in Writer’s Workshop, I will|3. When moving from the pros and cons | | |

| |ask students to check the Notes Center. |organizer to the argument graphic | | |

| |They will go there to compare their class |organizer, students will have multiple | | |

| |notes to my notes in order to check the |opportunities to read mentor texts and to | | |

| |thoroughness. In this way, Helena in |evaluate them using the checklist we will | | |

| |particular will have access to my set of |create together, as a whole class. The | | |

| |notes and see what she has missed. (She |final checklist, while student generated, | | |

| |sometimes says that she has taken notes, |should look very similar to the one I have| | |

| |but when I check I see missing details.) |pasted to the end of this document | | |

| | | | | |

| | |4. The mentor arguments will come in | | |

| | |texts, audio segments, videos with | | |

| | |speakers, and musical videos in order to | | |

| | |address the intelligences of diverse | | |

| | |learners. | | |

| | | | | |

| | |5. When learning about logical flow, I | | |

| | |will introduce the students to easelly, an| | |

| | |online tool on which they can represent | | |

| | |their arguments using a flow map in the | | |

| | |context of a poster. After this | | |

| | |introductory exercise, I will give | | |

| | |students the option to write their essay | | |

| | |using this online tool, with their | | |

| | |paragraphs embedded in a poster. The goal | | |

| | |of this goes beyond engagement. I will ask| | |

| | |them to use a flow map that shows | | |

| | |progression, and as they work with it I | | |

| | |will continually direct their attention to| | |

| | |the relationships between claims and | | |

| | |reasons and supportive details and | | |

| | |reasons. | | |

| | | | | |

| | |6. Students will have multiple | | |

| | |opportunities to collaborate in their | | |

| | |flexible groups. Already, this class of 4 | | |

| | |students is a small group. I will have | | |

| | |Helena sometimes peer edit with Anita | | |

| | |because Anita can encourage written | | |

| | |elaboration from Helena, and Helena, who | | |

| | |is particularly skilled at editing (focus | | |

| | |student strength), can help Anita with | | |

| | |editing her paper. | | |

| | | | | |

| | |Also, students are normally paired as | | |

| | |Antonio and Helena in one group and Maria | | |

| | |and Anita in a second group. This is to | | |

| | |maintain heterogeneous groupings that are | | |

| | |a bit closer to homogeneous than my | | |

| | |flexible group mentioned above. | | |

Using Assessment Data for Differentiated Planning and Instruction

|Describe how you will use this data to inform the curriculum planning of future lessons. Do you need to review, reteach, or accelerate any concepts? |

| |

|We are working on ELA Content Standard: W.4.1a. b. d. |

|1. Write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons and information. |

|a. Introduce a topic or text clearly, state an opinion, and create an organizational structure in which related ideas are grouped to support the writer’s purpose. |

|b. Provide reasons that are supported with facts and details. |

|d. Provide a concluding statement… related to the opinion presented. |

|To meet this standard, I plan to teach the organization of arguments and elaboration within arguments including the citation of sources using mentor texts. As a whole class, we will put together a checklist |

|showing what good arguments look like. The ending checklist will look similar to the one that is pasted at the end of this document. The formulation of the initial checklist will take several class sessions |

|because I want to chunk the sections of an argument. With each chunked section, students will demonstrate an understanding of particular skills, and I will assess quickwrites for each chunked section in order|

|to determine if all students are learning. |

| |

| |

|Describe how you will use this data (along with your knowledge of the students) to create flexible groups. |

| |

|Students will have multiple opportunities to collaborate in their regular heterogeneous pairs and in alternate flexible pairs. Already, this class of 4 students is a small group. |

| |

|Heterogeneous Pairs: The students are normally paired as Antonio and Helena in one group and Maria and Anita in a second group. This is to maintain heterogeneous groupings in which each partner is different |

|in level to the other partner, but not at the extreme levels of difference. |

|In writing, Antonio is generally medium high and Helena is low. Anita is high and Mia is medium low. |

| |

|Flexible Pairs: I will have Helena sometimes peer edit with Anita because Anita can encourage written elaboration from Helena, and Helena, who is particularly skilled at editing (focus student strength), can |

|help Anita with editing her paper. |

| |

|Homogeneous Pairs for Reading: In order to assist students at different reading levels, I will pair like readers together: Anita and Antonio in one group and Helena and Maria in another group. |

|Describe how you will use this data to create differentiated learning activities. Will you differentiate the content, the process, or the product? |

| |

|1. Differentiation in Content: Anita and Antonio are reading at a higher level than Maria and Helena. Hence, I will have students in homogenous reading groups at times with differentiated texts from |

|. |

| |

|2. Differentiation in Process: When articles are the same, I will have Anita and Antonio read aloud as a pair while I read with Maria and Helena as a pair. In the latter group, more time needs to be spent on |

|using context for vocabulary and for reading comprehension checks. |

| |

|2. Differentiation in Product: Anita and Antonio may achieve the writing benchmarks earlier, so I will have extensions ready for them. I will ask them to develop a counterargument section for their paper or |

|poster. |

| |

| |

*Please keep a copy of your Focus Student’s work.

Checklists from:

Calkins, Lucy. (2013). Writing Pathways: Performance Assessments and Learning Progressions. Heinemann. Portsmouth, NH. (pp. 92-95).

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

On Demand Writing Prompt, Pre-Assessment

Most of this text is from Lucy Calkins’ book. I have modified it a bit to suit my class and our current work.

Calkins, Lucy. (2013). Writing Pathways: Performance Assessments and Learning Progressions. Heinemann. Portsmouth, NH. (p. 86).

Instructions:

Think about the essential question of our recent Science Unit. You will have 45 minutes to write an opinion or argument text in which you will write your claim and tell reasons why you feel that way. When you do this, draw on everything you know about essays and argumentative texts. If you want to use your notes, you may. You will only have only 45 minutes to plan, draft, revise, and edit in one sitting. Give it your best shot. This is not for a grade; it is to help you formulate your ideas for the Socratic Seminar.

In your writing, make sure you:

1. Write an introduction.

2. State your claim.

3. Give reasons and evidence.

4. Organize your writing.

5. Acknowledge counterclaims (The Devil’s Advocate)

6. Use transition words.

7. Write a conclusion.

The Essential Questions for the Science Unit:

1. Does climate change affect humans and other animals? If so, how?

2. Does air pollution from fossil fuel emissions cause climate change?

3. So, to sum up the previous questions, does air pollution from fossil fuels affect humans and other animals? If so, how?

4. Is it acceptable to change some ecosystems and affect humans and other animals for the sake of human needs?

On Demand Writing Prompt, Post-assessment:

Think about the essential questions you have generated. You will have 45 minutes to write an opinion or argument text in which you will write your claim and tell reasons why you feel that way. When you do this, draw on everything you know about essays and argumentative texts. If you want to use your notes, you may. You will only have only 45 minutes to plan, draft, revise, and edit in one sitting. Give it your best shot. This is not for a grade, but to help you formulate your ideas.

In your writing, make sure you:

1. Write an introduction.

2. State your claim.

3. Give reasons and evidence.

4. Organize your writing.

5. Acknowledge counterclaims (The Devil’s Advocate)

6. Use transition words.

7. Write a conclusion.

Checklist

Elements for Writing 4th Grade Argumentative Essays (Circle the correct answer.)

Is there an introduction? Yes or No.

Does the introduction include a context for the argument? Yes or No.

Is a there an opinion or claim in the introduction? Yes or No.

Are two or more reasons briefly mentioned in the introduction? Yes or No.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the first body paragraph, is there a topic sentence? Yes or No.

Is the topic sentence a reason related to the opinion or claim? Yes or No.

Is there a supportive detail (quote, paraphrase, or fact) related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the detail explained? Yes or No.

Is there a second supportive detail related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the second detail explained? Yes or No.

Was the importance of the reason explained? Yes or No.

Did I give credit to other authors or people for the details? Yes or No.

Was a transition word or phrase used to present the reason? Yes or No.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the second body paragraph, is there a topic sentence? Yes or No.

Is the topic sentence a reason related to the opinion or claim? Yes or No.

Is there a supportive detail (quote, paraphrase, or fact) related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the detail explained? Yes or No.

Is there a second supportive detail related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the second detail explained? Yes or No.

Was the importance of the reason explained? Yes or No.

Did I give credit to other authors or people for the details? Yes or No.

Was a transition word or phrase used to present the reason? Yes or No.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the third body paragraph, is there a topic sentence? Yes or No.

Is the topic sentence a reason related to the opinion or claim? Yes or No.

Is there a supportive detail (quote, paraphrase, or fact) related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the detail explained? Yes or No.

Is there a second supportive detail related to the reason? Yes or No.

Is the second detail explained? Yes or No.

Was the importance of the reason explained? Yes or No.

Did I give credit to other authors or people for the details? Yes or No.

Was a transition word or phrase used to present the reason? Yes or No.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there a conclusion? Yes or No.

Is the opinion or claim mentioned again in the conclusion? Yes or No.

Is the significance of the opinion or claim reiterated? Yes or No.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------

Overall, are exaggerations eliminated? Yes or No.

Overall, did I repeat any words too much? Yes or No.

-----------------------

North Coast Beginning Teacher Program

STUDENT WORK ANALYSIS

DIRECTIONS

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download