Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF)Nevada Educator . Performance Framework (NEPF)...

Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF)

Instructional Practices New Learning is Connected to Prior Learning and Experience

Agenda

1. Nevada’s High Leverage In-

structional Standard 1

2. Instructional Standard 1’s Indi-

cators and Associated Activities

3. Lesson Planning with Prior

Learning in Mind

Objectives

I will differentiate the four indi-cators of the NEPF’s Instruction-al Standard 1 by analyzing theircharacteristics.

I will explore ideas and strate-gies for each indicator of theNEPF’s Instructional Standard 1by participating in various activi-ties.

Name: _______________________________

Page 1

Vocabulary for NV High Leverage Instructional Standard 1

Directions:

Before you define, draw a picture and state characteristics or how you are connected to the word, rate your how well you know the word.

1. I’ve never heard the word. 3. I’ve have some understanding of the word. 2. I’ve heard the word before, but I am not sure what it means. 4. I am an expert on this word. I can define the word and use it correctly.

Word Rate Definition Picture Examples and/or

Characteristics Rate

prior learning

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

initial under-standings

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

previously taught

knowledge

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

activating prior learning

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

build on initial understandings

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

methods

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

modes

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

Page 2

Prior Knowledge and Making Connections

Directions:

Step 1: Find a partner and take turns recording knowledge about the topic. Step 2: With your partner, take turns recording the connection to new learning. Step 3: With your partner, discuss the reflection question and record your response on the lines provided.

Topic: Prior Learning

Partner 1: Prior knowledge about the topic Partner 2: Prior knowledge about the topic

Partner 1: How does the information you have

learned connect to your prior knowledge?

Partner 2: How does the information you have

learned connect to you prior knowledge?

Reflection: Which partner’s prior knowledge was more closely connected to the topic? Explain.

STEP 1

STEP 2

STEP 3

Page 3

HAND

OUT #

1 – S

TAND

ARDS

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

" "

Indi

cato

r 1

Teac

her a

ctiv

ates

all

stud

ents

’ ini

tial

unde

rsta

ndin

gs o

f new

co

ncep

ts a

nd s

kills

Indi

cato

r 1

Task

s pu

rpos

eful

ly e

mpl

oy

all s

tude

nts’

cog

nitiv

e ab

ilitie

s an

d sk

ills

Indi

cato

r 1

Teac

her p

rovi

des

oppo

rtuni

ties

for e

xten

ded,

pr

oduc

tive

disc

ours

e be

twee

n th

e te

ache

r and

st

uden

t(s) a

nd a

mon

g st

uden

ts

Indi

cato

r 1

Teac

her a

nd a

ll st

uden

ts

unde

rsta

nd w

hat s

tude

nts

are

lear

ning

, why

they

are

le

arni

ng it

, and

how

they

will

kn

ow if

they

hav

e le

arne

d it

Indi

cato

r 1

Teac

her p

lans

on-

goin

g le

arni

ng o

ppor

tuni

ties

base

d on

evi

denc

e of

all

stud

ents

’ cu

rren

t lea

rnin

g st

atus

Indi

cato

r 2

Teac

her m

akes

con

nect

ions

ex

plic

it be

twee

n pr

evio

us

lear

ning

and

new

con

cept

s an

d sk

ills

for a

ll st

uden

ts

Indi

cato

r 2

Task

s pl

ace

appr

opria

te

dem

ands

on

each

stu

dent

Indi

cato

r 2

Teac

her p

rovi

des

oppo

rtuni

ties

for a

ll st

uden

ts

to c

reat

e an

d in

terp

ret

mul

tiple

repr

esen

tatio

ns

Indi

cato

r 2

Teac

her s

truct

ures

op

portu

nitie

s fo

r sel

f-m

onito

red

lear

ning

for a

ll st

uden

ts

Indi

cato

r 2

Teac

her a

ligns

ass

essm

ent

oppo

rtuni

ties

with

lear

ning

go

als

and

perfo

rman

ce

crite

ria

Indi

cato

r 3

Teac

her m

akes

cle

ar th

e pu

rpos

e an

d re

leva

nce

of

new

lear

ning

for a

ll st

uden

ts

Indi

cato

r 3

Task

s pr

ogre

ssiv

ely

deve

lop

all s

tude

nts’

cog

nitiv

e ab

ilitie

s an

d sk

ills

Indi

cato

r 3

Teac

her a

ssis

ts a

ll st

uden

ts

to u

se e

xist

ing

know

ledg

e an

d pr

ior e

xper

ienc

e to

mak

e co

nnec

tions

and

reco

gniz

e re

latio

nshi

ps

Indi

cato

r 3

Teac

her s

uppo

rts a

ll st

uden

ts to

take

act

ions

ba

sed

on th

e st

uden

ts’ o

wn

self-

mon

itorin

g pr

oces

ses

Indi

cato

r 3

Teac

her s

truct

ures

op

portu

nitie

s to

gen

erat

e ev

iden

ce o

f lea

rnin

g du

ring

the

less

on o

f all

stud

ents

Indi

cato

r 4

Teac

her p

rovi

des

all

stud

ents

opp

ortu

nitie

s to

bu

ild o

n or

cha

lleng

e in

itial

un

ders

tand

ings

Indi

cato

r 4

Teac

her o

pera

tes

with

a

deep

bel

ief t

hat a

ll ch

ildre

n ca

n ac

hiev

e re

gard

less

of

race

, per

ceiv

ed a

bilit

y an

d so

cio-

econ

omic

sta

tus.

Indi

cato

r 4

Teac

her s

truct

ures

the

clas

sroo

m e

nviro

nmen

t to

enab

le c

olla

bora

tion,

pa

rtici

patio

n, a

nd a

pos

itive

af

fect

ive

expe

rienc

e fo

r all

stud

ents

Indi

cato

r 4

Teac

her a

dapt

s ac

tions

ba

sed

on e

vide

nce

gene

rate

d in

the

less

on fo

r al

l stu

dent

s

12

34

5St

anda

rd 1!

New

Lea

rnin

g is

C

onne

cted

to P

rior

Lear

ning

and

Exp

erie

nce"

"

Stan

dard

2!

Lear

ning

Tas

ks h

ave

Hig

h C

ogni

tive

Dem

and

for

Div

erse

Lea

rner

s" "

Stan

dard

3!

Stud

ents

Eng

age

in

Mea

ning

-Mak

ing

thro

ugh

Dis

cour

se a

nd O

ther

St

rate

gies"

Stan

dard

4!

Stud

ents

Eng

age

in

Met

acog

nitiv

e Ac

tivity

to

Incr

ease

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f an

d R

espo

nsib

ility

for T

heir

Ow

n Le

arni

ng"

"

Stan

dard

5!

Asse

ssm

ent i

s In

tegr

ated

in

to In

stru

ctio

n"

Page 4

Literature Review for the Five High-Leverage Instructional Principles

Principle 1 New Learning is Connected to Prior Learning and Experience

Prior knowledge is a critical variable in learning (Dochy, Segers, & Buehl, 1999; Shapiro, 2004), and its influence on learning is well documented in the research literature. In particular, research in cognition has shown that what learners know and the extent to which their prior knowledge is activated during new learning has important implications for whether new information will make sense to them.

In their classic study, Bransford and Johnson (1972) found that prior knowledge was an important factor in both learning and memory. Researchers presented all study participants with cryptic text; some participants were given appropriate information before they heard passages, while others were given the same information after hearing the passages. Comprehension scores were significantly higher for participants who received information prior to listening to the passage. The authors concluded that prior knowledge itself does not guarantee its usefulness for comprehension unless it is activated in an appropriate context prior to the presentation of new knowledge. Numerous studies have supported Branford and Johnson’s findings, especially in the area of text comprehension in various subject areas (e.g., Chiang & Dunkel, 1992; Clifton & Slowiaczek, 1981; Dochy et al., 1999; Johnston & Pearson, 1982; Matthews, 1982; McKeown, Beck, Sinatra, & Loxterman, 1992; McNamara, Kintsch, Songer, & Kintsch, 1996; Siegler, 1983; Siegler & Klahr, 1982; Willoughby, Waller, Wood, & MacKinnon, 1993).

Schema Theory Schema theory is strongly represented in the prior knowledge literature. The term schema (plural schemata) was first used in 1926 by Piaget, who viewed schemata as the building blocks of thinking that included both a category of knowledge and a process for acquiring the knowledge (Woolfolk, 1987). Piaget theorized that when knowledge is acquired, schemata adapt to incorporate and organize the new learning. In a further elaboration, Jerome Bruner (1966) proposed a theoretical framework developed from research on cognition and child development. A major theme of his framework was that learners construct new concepts based on their current and prior knowledge. Learners select and transform information using existing cognitive structures – schemata - that enable them to organize knowledge and experiences, and apply their knowledge to new situations. In further developments of schema theory, scholars have

Page 5


identified qualitatively different phases of the learning process (Anderson, 1977; Rumelhart & Norman, 1978; 1982).

Still in the context of schema theory, research on novice-expert performance, and of what constitutes expertise in a subject area, have helped to define the characteristics of knowledge and thought at advanced stages of learning and practice (Chase & Simon, 1973; Chi, Bassok, Lewis, Reimann, & Glaser, 1989; Chi, Feltovich, & Glaser, 1981; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982; Chi & Roscoe, 2002; Chi, Slotta, & deLeeuw, 1994; Chi & VanLehn, 1991; Glaser, 1984; Ferrari & Chi, 1998; Larkin, McDermott, Simon, & Simon, 1980; Newell, 1990). This body of research shows that experts have extensive stores of knowledge and skills, but most importantly they have efficiently organized this knowledge into well-connected schemata (NRC, 2001). It is this “organization of knowledge that underlies experts’ abilities to understand and solve problems” (NRC, 2005, p. 15). For example, when confronted with a mathematics or physics problem, novice students will try to relate it to a memorized theorem or formula (Good & Brophy, 1990). In contrast, experts identify the problem as a particular instance of the application of general principles, and are able to activate existing schemata organized around those principles and abstractions (Glaser, 1984; Good & Brophy, 1990; NRC, 2001). For the expert, these aspects of knowledge – principles, abstractions and applications- are organized in tightly connected schemata (Glaser, 1984). In the same vein, Good and Brophy (1994) argued that knowledge should be viewed as being “composed of networks structured around key ideas” (p. 416).

Misconceptions and Differences in Prior Knowledge Prior knowledge also includes the incorrect understandings a student may bring to new learning. Misconceptions in prior knowledge and their effects on learning have been well documented, especially in the area of science learning. Of particular note is students’ resistance to altering their views in light of new information when it is inconsistent with their prior knowledge, even when the new information provides a better, more accurate account of the phenomenon (e.g., Alvermann & Hague, 1989; Alvermann & Hynd, 1989; Hynd & Alvermann, 1989). Because inaccuracies, misconceptions, or naïve understandings in students’ prior knowledge can be detrimental to future learning if they are not identified and directly addressed (Chinn & Brewer, 1993; Cohen, 1981; Guzzetti, Snyder, Glass, & Gamas, 1993; Mestre, 1994; Perkins & Simmons, 1988; Wandersee, 1983), researchers have suggested instructional techniques to promote conceptual change. Some techniques involve explicitly addressing misconceptions so students recognize differences between new information and existing knowledge (Beimans & Simmons, 1994; Guzzetti et al., 1993; Spires,

Page 6


Donley, & Penrose, 1990), or encouraging students to restructure knowledge and revise existing conceptions through the use of metacognitive and motivational factors, such as developing learning goals, self-efficacy, and control beliefs (Pintrich, Marx, & Boyle, 1993). In situations where students’ prior knowledge is not engaged and preconceptions are not revealed, students often retain new information long enough to perform well on tests, and then revert back to their preconceptions, correct or not (NRC, 2000).

Prior knowledge also includes the knowledge that learners acquire outside of school settings, such as in their homes and communities. This type of prior knowledge develops as a result of learners’ social roles, including their race/ethnicity, culture, gender, and class (Cazden, 2001; Gee, 1989; Lave, 1988; Rogoff, 1998). Prior knowledge learned from social roles can both support and conflict with students’ learning in schools (Greenfield & Suzuki, 1998). For example, Heath (1983) found that everyday family habits can be ignored or reinforced in schools by teachers, which in turn, affects how students learn. To connect new learning with prior knowledge, teachers need to be able to take account of the social and cultural prior knowledge with which students enter schools.

Elici t ing Prior Knowledge Research has shown that different ways of eliciting prior knowledge results in students showing different types and levels of prior knowledge. Studies in different content areas have employed a variety of techniques to assess learners’ prior knowledge, such as questioning, free recall, association and recognition tests, and multiple-choice tests (Chiang & Dunkel, 1992; Chiesi, Spilich, & Voss, 1979; Dochy, 1996; Dochy, Segers, &Buehl, 1999; Hasselhorn & Korkel, 1986; Lambiotte & Dansereau, 1992; Sanbonmatsu, Sansone, & Kardes, 1991). In their study, Valencia, Stallmand, Commeyras, Pearson, and Hartman (1991) used four different methods to assess student prior knowledge and found that different assessment methods revealed different amounts and types of information. They concluded that multiple modes, forms, and methods should be used to get a complete characterization of students’ prior knowledge.

In summary, prior knowledge is a critical variable in learning. The National Research Council (NRC) commissioned the report, How People Learn (NRC, 2000), to examine and synthesize theoretical and empirical evidence of learning and cognition. A key finding of the report is that teachers must work with students’ preexisting understandings in order for them to learn new information. According to theoretical

Page 7


and empirical literature documented in this review, learners construct knowledge by connecting new concepts and information to prior knowledge. As Shuell (1986) states, “Learning is cumulative in nature; nothing is learned in isolation” (p. 416).

Page 8

Key Ideas from Theory and Research

Standard 1: New Learning is Connected to Prior Learning and Experience

Directions: Read the excerpts from the research base for Standard 1. As you read each paragraph, highlight key words.

● Learners select and transform information using existing cognitive structures – schemata –that enable them to organize knowledge and experiences, and apply their knowledge tonew situations (Anderson, 1977; Bruner, 1966; Rumelhart & Norman, 1978, 1982).

● Experts have extensive stores of knowledge and skills, but most importantly they haveefficiently organized this knowledge into well-‐connected schemata (e.g., Chi & Roscoe,2002; Newell, 1990). It is this “organization of knowledge that underlies experts’ abilities tounderstand and solve problems” (National Research Council, 2005, p. 15).

● Prior knowledge itself does not guarantee its usefulness in learning new concepts unless it isactivated in an appropriate context prior to presentation of new knowledge (Bransford &Johnson, 1972; Chiang & Dunkel, 1992).

● In situations where students’ prior knowledge is not engaged and preconceptions are notrevealed, students often retain new information long enough to perform well on tests, andthen revert back to their preconceptions, correct or not (National Research Council, 2000).

● To connect new learning with prior knowledge, teachers need to be able to take account ofthe social and cultural prior knowledge with which students enter schools (Cazden, 2001;Gee, 1989).

● Multiple modes, forms, and methods should be used to get a complete characterization ofstudents’ prior knowledge (Valencia et al., 1991).

HANDOUT #3 LESSON 1

Page 9

Methods Modes

Ind

icator 1

In

dicato

r 2

Ind

icator 3

In

dicato

r 4

Prior Learning Behaviors for Teacher & Students

Directions: For each indicator, write examples of methods and modes.

Page 10

Term Definition

Content Ob-jectives

Statements that clearly identify what students should learn and be able to do by the end of a given lesson. These statements come from our state content standards, and must be written in measureable, observable, and student friendly language. A well written content objective contains the following components: audience, verb, lesson topic, condition and measure. To make clear the purpose and relevance of new learning, content objectives need to be stated at the beginning of the lesson, throughout the lesson and at the end of the lesson.

Audience The audience indicates who the intended target is. In a content objective, the intended target is always the student. Possible content objective sentence starters are: I will…; I can…; The student will…; The learner will…; The student will be able to…

Verb The verb in the content objective is determined by the state content standard and must meet the rigor and complexity of the standard.

Lesson Topic The lesson topic states the concept or skill students are learning. The lesson topic is strictly content related.

Condition The condition in the content objective determines how students will carry out the objective’s verb and les-son’s concept or skill. The condition may be represented by a specific resource, supplementary material, or support tool.

Measure The measure in the content objective determines the degree of accuracy students must demonstrate to mas-ter the content objective.

Examples of Content Objectives

Elemen-tary

Math I will compare and contrast trapezoids and parallelograms in a double bubble map.

ELA I will make inferences and draw conclusions using pictures.

SS I will identify the functions of government by participating in a sort.

SCI I will analyze deltas and canyons by participating in Reciprocal Teaching.

Middle School

Math The student will represent a linear function in multiple ways in a graphic organizer.

ELA The student will write a biography of his favorite movie star by using internet resources.

SS The student will explain why large numbers of settlers headed to Oregon Country by reading adapted text.

SCI The student examine changes caused by natural selection by viewing a video.

High School

Math The student will graph quadratic functions using tables.

ELA The student will make inferences and draw conclusions about how an author's sensory language cre-ates imagery in biblical allusions found in passages.

SS The student will evaluate the causes of the American Revolution by reading an article.

SCI The student will distinguish between meiosis and mitosis by sorting pictures.

The Relevance of Prior Learning to Content Objectives

©2015, CAVI Page 11

1. What do students need to learn today?

2. If a new concept is being introduced, how will I activate students’ initial understandings of thenew concept? If I find out they have little or no prior knowledge, how will I fill in instructionalgaps?

3. What concepts, vocabulary and material must I review to help students link past learning tothe new concept?

4. What new vocabulary must I introduce?

5. How will I explicitly model and guide new learning and allow students to practice the newlyacquired content knowledge? (I DO, WE DO, YOU DO)

6. If no new content is being introduced, how will students apply the newly acquired content andlanguage knowledge?

7. How will I determine if students met the content objective(s)?

Pri

or

Lear

nin

gLesson Planning with Prior Learning in Mind


Lesson Title: ____________________________

Content Standards

Content Objective(s)

Key Vocabulary Supplementary Materials Instructional Techniques

Content General Academic Words or

Word Parts

Lesson Delivery Plan


Instructional Technique

Description

1‐2‐3 Group Students count off 1 to 3. All the 1’s are assigned a topic/task, all the 2’s are assigned a different topic/task, and the 3’s are assigned a different topic/task. Once students are finished researching their assigned topic/task, students group in triads of 1, 2 and 3 and they share their findings with their small group.

Accountable Conversation Questions

Accountable Conversation Questions set up a classroom expectation that students do not have an option of not participating in classroom discussions by saying, “I don’t know”. However, if students need additional time to processing time to think, they can ask questions like: May I have more time to think?, Will you please repeat the question?, May I ask a friend for help? (Seidlitz & Perryman, 2008)

Adapted Text Adapted text is any text that has been changed from its original print format. This includes a variety of strategies to make traditional text accessible to students with a variety of learning styles. This may include presenting the text in a different visual manner (e.g. enlarged text), auditory (e.g. audio book) or simplified manner (e.g. abridged version, outline, matrix).

Affirmations An exceptional tool for student motivation, confidence‐building, and skill enhancement.

Attention Signals Call actions to get the attention of the entire class. "If you hear my voice, clap once. If you hear my voice, clap twice."; "Let's come back together in 3, 2, 1." "If teacher says 'To Infinity', students respond 'And Beyond'."

Blast to the Past A strategy used to review previously covered material or vocabulary. Students are placed in groups and asked to list 3 things they learned, 2 questions they still have and the 1 thing they found the most interesting

Buzzing With Words Buzzing with Words is a strategy that uses a graphic organizer for vocabulary building. Students are required to rate their knowledge of the term/concept prior and after vocabulary instruction, define the term/concept in their own words, create a visual of the term/concept and list characteristics of the term/concept.

Carousel Activity This activity encourages interaction among students as they answer questions posted around the room. Groups are assigned to a station and are given a specified time to answer the station’s question. Groups rotate around the room until they have answered all questions. (Comments from CRISS, 1996)

Concept Definition Map Students process the meaning of a term or concept by creating a visual organizer that asks them four questions: What is the term? What is it?, What is it like? What are some examples? (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008)

Conga Line Students form two lines facing one another. Students share information with the person standing in front of them. After they are finished sharing, one line remains stationary as one student from the moving row runs down the Conga Line and joins the end of his/her row. Students in the moving row move one person in so that each student has a new partner. This process is repeated in order to provide all students with multiple opportunities to practice their oral language skills. (Echevarria & Vogt, 2008)

Cross the Line Students are given two choices. Students stand on opposite sides of the classroom based on the choice they selected. Opposite teams try to persuade each other by crossing the line and coming over to their team.

Double Bubble Map A graphic organizer used to compare similarities and contrast differences of two terms/concepts.

Expert Teacher Students work in small groups to create a poster for the information they have learned. Students rotate to different posters while one spokesperson stays behind to share with fellow students the information on the topic.

Fold the Line Students line up chronologically based on a predetermined characteristic such as height, age, number of pets, etc. The line then folds in half upon itself providing each student to have a partner. Students are then asked to formulate a response/answer to a task or question. Depending on the task/question, students use formal or informal English to share responses with their partner. (Kagan, 1992)

Frayer Model The Frayer Model is a strategy that uses a graphic organizer for vocabulary building. This technique requires students to define the target vocabulary words or concepts, create a picture of the term/concept and apply this information by generating examples and non‐examples.

Graffiti Write This instructional technique is used to access prior knowledge or review key content concepts/vocabulary. Students are grouped in sets of 3‐5. Each group is provided with a chart paper that contains the concept or key term in the center of the paper. The sheet is divided into the total number of students in the group. Students are given 2‐3 minutes to write linguistic and nonlinguistic representations of what they know or learned about the concept/term. (Think Literacy: Cross‐Curricular Approaches, 2003)

Illustrations Students create an illustration to summarize what they read.

Inside‐Outside Circle Students are divided into two equal groups. One group forms a circle. The remaining students form an outer circle by standing in front of a student who is in the inside circle. Students share information with their partner and then the outside circle rotates so that they can share with a new partner. (Kagan, 1994)

Jigsaw Activity Assign students different parts of a text to read and summarize. Once all students are done reading and summarizing their assigned sections, have them share their assigned section to other students who were assigned different parts of the text.

KWL This technique activates students’ prior knowledge by asking them what they know, what they would like to know and what they learned about a topic. (Ogle, 1986).

Page 14

Instructional Technique

Description

Martian Walk Students work in pairs on a given task. Pairs are asked to stand up and form a Martian couple by standing adjacent to their partner. Martian couples walk around the class with their outer hands raised to signal they are available to share their findings with another Martian couple. Once Martian couples share their findings, their outer hands go up again and they find another available Martian couple.

Mix and Match Each student is given an index card with information that matches the information on another student’s card. Students produce oral language as they describe what is on their card to find a match.

Music Mingle Meet The activity's purpose is to get students to interact with one another. Each student completes a task or answers a question. The teacher plays music and students mingle around the room. When the music stops. students are asked to meet with the person closest to them and share their answers

Non‐Linguistic Representations

A way of representing information of gained knowledge through illustrations, graphic organizers, physical models, and kinesthetic activities (Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J., 2001)

Numbered Heads Together

Numbered Heads Together is a Kagan cooperative learning strategy that holds each student accountable for learning the material. Students are placed in groups and each person is given a number (from one to the maximum number in each group). The teacher poses a question and students "put their heads together" to figure out the answer. The teacher calls a specific number to respond as spokesperson for the group.

Outcome Sentences This activity provides the opportunity to bring closure or to wrap up a lesson. Students select one of the following sentence stems and complete the sentence. (Echevarria, Short, & Vogt, 2008) I liked…, I think… , I wonder… , I learned…

Quick Write This technique can be used to activate prior knowledge or to review a concept/term. Students write one or two sentences about a topic and share it with a partner.

Role Plays Students take on a role and act it out to show their understanding of a given topic, concept or text.

Scanning This activity is great to teach vocabulary. Students are instructed to scan a text for unfamiliar terms. After students are finished scanning for unfamiliar words, the teacher proceeds to providing brief definitions of the terms.

Self‐Assessment Signals A quick and easy way to check for understanding. Students can use hand signals or objects to represent their understanding of recently taught material.

Sentence Frames A method used for scaffolding oral language and writing skills. Students are provided a sentence starter to answer questions. For example: “The answer is…”, “A stage of the water cycle is…”

Simultaneous Round Table

This activity’s purpose is to activate prior knowledge or review a topic. Students are grouped in small groups of 4‐5. Each individual in the group is provided with a paper that has a given review topic, etc. Students are given aspecified amount of time to complete the task and when time is up, they pass their paper to the partner who is sitting counterclockwise to them. The process continues until each student has had a chance to generate answers to the task on each of the papers.

Snowball Fight Students write a message or answer a question on a piece of paper. Students crumble their papers up and throw them around the room until the teacher calls time. When time is over, students pick up the paper that is closest to them and read the message.

Sorting A sorting activity in which students classify numbers, equations, geometric shapes, etc. based on given categories. For example, students are given 20 systems of linear equations cards and their responsibility is to determine whether each system belongs under the category of parallel lines, perpendicular lines or neither.

Structured Conversations

Students are given sentence frames to begin the conversation and specific questions and sentence starters to extend the conversation.

Think‐Pair‐Share Students are asked a question and are given time to reflect. The teacher then tells students to pair up with a partner and share their answers. (Lyman, 1981)

Tools to Randomize Participation

Tools used to randomly call on students to participate in oral discussion.

Total Physical Response (TPR)

A non‐linguistic way to make content comprehensible by having students use gestures and movements of learned content. (Asher, J., 1967)

Visual‐Verbal‐Word‐Association (VVWA)

This graphic organizer helps students understand the meaning of key concepts and/or terms through visual and personal associations. (Eeds & Cockrum, 1985)

Vocabulary Alive Students memorize a lesson’s key vocabulary by applying gestures to each term. The gestures can be assigned by the teacher or by students. Once the gestures are determined, each term and its gesture is introduced by saying, “The word is _____ and it looks like this _____.” (Created by Cristina Ferrari, Brownsville ISD)

Whiteboard Responses Students are provided with whiteboards and dry erase markers. Students answer questions on the whiteboards and when the teacher calls time, all students raise their boards. This technique provides teachers with a quick assessment of student understanding.

Page 15

HAND

OUT #

1 – S

TAND

ARDS

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

Wha

t Tea

cher

s N

eed

to

Dem

onst

rate!

Man

dato

ry E

vide

nce

Sour

ces

of In

stru

ctio

nal P

ract

ice!

Opt

iona

l Evi

denc

e So

urce

s of

In

stru

ctio

nal P

ract

ice!

Des

crip

tion/

Not

es!

Indi

cato

r 1"

Teac

her a

ctiv

ates

all

stud

ents

’ in

itial

und

erst

andi

ngs

of n

ew

conc

epts

and

ski

lls"

• D

irect

eva

luat

or o

bser

vatio

n"• 

One

con

firm

ator

y ite

m fr

omop

tiona

l evi

denc

e so

urce"

• Le

sson

pla

n"• 

Teac

her p

re/p

ost c

onfe

renc

e"• 

Stud

ent w

ork"

• In

itial

und

erst

andi

ngs

can

som

etim

es s

uppo

rt or

confl

ict w

ith le

arni

ng n

ew c

once

pts/

idea

s"• 

If in

itial

und

erst

andi

ngs

are

igno

red,

the

unde

rsta

ndin

gs th

at s

tude

nts

deve

lop

can

be v

ery

diffe

rent

from

wha

t the

teac

her i

nten

ds"

• Te

ache

r nee

ds to

pay

atte

ntio

n to

stu

dent

s’in

com

plet

e un

ders

tand

ings

and

mis

conc

eptio

nsth

at th

ey b

ring

with

them

to a

giv

en to

pic"

"In

dica

tor 2"

Teac

her m

akes

con

nect

ions

ex

plic

it be

twee

n pr

evio

us

lear

ning

and

new

con

cept

s an

d sk

ills fo

r all

stud

ents"

• D

irect

eva

luat

or o

bser

vatio

n"• 

One

con

firm

ator

y ite

m fr

omop

tiona

l evi

denc

e so

urce"

• Le

sson

pla

n"• 

Teac

her p

re/p

ost c

onfe

renc

e"• 

Stud

ent c

lass

room

inte

rvie

ws"

• St

uden

t fee

dbac

k (e

.g.,

surv

ey,

writ

ing)"

"

• St

uden

ts’ p

revi

ous

lear

ning

incl

udes

lear

ning

that

occu

rs in

and

out

of s

choo

l con

text

s" "

Indi

cato

r 3"

Teac

her m

akes

cle

ar th

e pu

rpos

e an

d re

leva

nce

of n

ew

lear

ning

for a

ll st

uden

ts"

"

• D

irect

eva

luat

or o

bser

vatio

n"• 

Stud

ent c

lass

room

inte

rvie

ws"

"

• Le

sson

pla

n"• 

Teac

her p

re/p

ost c

onfe

renc

e"• 

Stud

ent f

eedb

ack

(e.g

., su

rvey

,w

ritin

g)"

"

• R

elev

ance

of n

ew le

arni

ng in

clud

es c

onne

ctin

gne

w le

arni

ng to

the

broa

der l

earn

ing

goal

s of

the

less

on a

nd u

nder

stan

ding

pur

pose

of l

earn

ing"

• St

uden

ts s

houl

d be

ans

wer

ing

the

ques

tion:

Wha

tis

the

poin

t?"

Indi

cato

r 4"

Teac

her p

rovi

des

all s

tude

nts

oppo

rtuni

ties

to b

uild

on

or

chal

leng

e in

itial

un

ders

tand

ings"

• D

irect

eva

luat

or o

bser

vatio

n"• 

One

con

firm

ator

y ite

m fr

omop

tiona

l evi

denc

e so

urce"

• Le

sson

pla

n"• 

Teac

her p

re/p

ost c

onfe

renc

e"• 

Stud

ent c

lass

room

inte

rvie

ws"

• St

uden

t fee

dbac

k (e

.g.,

surv

ey,

writ

ing)"

• St

uden

t wor

k"

• Te

ache

r nee

ds to

inte

rpre

t lev

els

of s

tude

nts’

initi

al u

nder

stan

ding

s in

ord

er to

mov

e le

arni

ngfo

rwar

d"

Stan

dard

1: N

ew L

earn

ing

is C

onne

cted

to P

rior L

earn

ing

and

Expe

rienc

e!In

dica

tors !

1!

Page 16

Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF)Nevada Educator . Performance Framework (NEPF)...

Documents

Transcript of Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF)Nevada Educator . Performance Framework (NEPF)...