Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Week 12: Assignment 2- Lesson plan
The introduction of digital technology into education has been one of the most fundamental changes the system has had. Its title wave effects have changed the way teacher’s teach, the ways students learn, and is currently shifting the patterns of how effective teachers can be with the available technology.
Since I have been quite keen about the subject, and I have taken the time to read many scholarly articles about this current trend in education, its challenges, issues of implementation, and of course, its potential benefits, the articles that I read for this week were all excellent and definitely display the potential benefits and fantastic tools available to have students engage in deep way with digital tools, as well as fantastic strategies to teach students to master skills that will become fundamental for their lives. Being member of the technology committee for my district, and being the CLT (Technology lead for my school) and the website director, I understand the importance of assuring that technology becomes an integral part of how we teach. I am one of the biggest advocates in my district for the implementation of technology, and currently I find myself in the midst of working to shift teachers in my district to implement strategies for flipping components of their teaching. Therefore, the lesson for this week was important in that it is the area of teaching which I feel very familiar with, and which log to become more knowledgeable about as time goes by.
As stated in the articles, electronic publishing
can be used to differentiate by allowing students to work with the various
elements available. Teacher can use graphic organizer (there are plenty
of online ones now!). Teachers can have students peer edit other students work,
and now there are also great tools available online!). This can be done for any
subject that you may teach or any topic you may be covering with your students.
--Click here to see the lesson.
-1 Pager template
-Rubric
-Real student sample #1
-Student Sample #2
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Monday, April 11, 2016
Keystone assignment: QRI-5 Assessment
Click here to see Finalized QRI-5 Report
Click here to see records from assessment
First Recommendation
Click here to see recommended lesson #1 (Identifying details with graphic organizer)
Click here to see recommended lesson #2 (Identifying cause and effect with organizer)
Second Recommendation
Click here to see recommended sample lesson (Past tense verbs)
Click here to see records from assessment
First Recommendation
Click here to see recommended lesson #1 (Identifying details with graphic organizer)
Click here to see recommended lesson #2 (Identifying cause and effect with organizer)
Second Recommendation
Click here to see recommended sample lesson (Past tense verbs)
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Week 9: Assignment 4 -- QRI-5 vs D.I.B.E.L.S
Summary
The DIBELS
(Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) is a reading assessment
used to calculate a student’s reading levels. The exam is created to assess
fluency measurements used to monitor the development of early literacy and
early reading skills. The point of this assessment is to measure certain early
literacy skills, focusing on a key part of phonemic awareness. The assessment
does not measure
all possible phonemic skills. The purpose of the DIBELS Benchmark goals is to
provide educators with standards for measuring the progress of all or certain
students. The calculated or benchmarked goals attained after assessments
represent a level of performance for all students to reach in order to be
considered on track for becoming a successful reader. What makes this
assessment important is that it provides a benchmark to see where students are
at in regards to important set of skills for accurate reading. That way,
teachers can use students' performance in the test – not in class- to identify
struggling students who will most likely require more intensive instruction.
On the other hand, the QRI-5 is an informal assessment process which
can be used to identify a student’s instructional level. This assessment can also determine areas of
reading that a particular students may be having difficulty with. The assessment
opens up an opportunity to follow student progress by providing specific
criteria as to the students reading level within each grade level. QRI-5
provides varieties of diagnostic options for students being assessed, since it
has multiple steps. Identifying the reading levels of students allows the assessor
to have information in order to match up the required materials needed for that
particular student assessed.
Similarities and differences
Both assessments (QRI-5 & DIBELS) can
be used to provide data to drive instruction on a continuous basis. The data
gathered from the assessments can be used to specifically determine students’
reading levels. Both assessments can specifically
point to troubled areas of reading and fluency in the child being assessed,
thus giving the educator data to plan for skills to strengthen. The data can
very easily guide the teacher as to what focus when strategically planning for
a particular curriculum. The results from data gathered from both assessments can
as well give the educator an idea as to the appropriate books, reading
workshops, and even and provide ideas as to how to group students when working collaborative.
Data from assessments can be used to construct and implement intervention
instruction for students that may require such services.
The assessments are different in that one
is formal, and the other one informal from that stand point, one (the DIEBELS)
provides comparative data though standardized assessments. As such, the QRI-5
does not use comparative data and thus results are unique to the individual
assessed. Being that the DIBELS is
standardized, it will be very similar to all the students being assessed. The QRI-5
does not contain time limitations when administered, potentially making it a
time consuming task. On the other hand, the DIBELS is designed to be
administered in certain frequencies that make it practical. The QRI-5 does not necessarily
need to be administered more than once (unless, of course, teacher wants to
follow though after a first assessment), therefore, it differs from the DIBELS
in that this tool request assessments take place every three months to monitor
student as the year progresses. Practical use in the classroom
Overall,
both assessments are effective and useful tools for educators to use in the
classroom. The QRI-5 would be an excellent tool to be able to diagnose students
at the beginning of the school year, and to get a good idea as to where
students are and what they will be able to handle in regards to material in
class. This tool would be very efficient in helping the teacher make important decisions
as to where every student is at, and how you are going g to group students, our
how you can assign work individually. This would make a great predictor, as to
the types of reading, and some of the skills you may want to focus throughout the
schoolyear. On the other hand, the DIBELS can be a great way to formally assess
student’s levels and use the data from assessment to drive the instruction.
Since there is comparative data attained from the DIBELS, and the exams are
easily administered, this can be useful assessment to be used in a frequent basis
to monitor student progress. Thus the DIBELS assessment demonstrates
to be a more productive progress monitoring technique for educators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)