Noriega AsmtC 050819

Noriega, 1
Assessment C: Candidate Effect on Student Learning
http://clipart-library.com/teacher-and-students-clipart.html
Talissa Noriega
ITE 391
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa
Spring 2019
Table of Contents
Reflection on Professional Growth ........................................................................................................................ 5
Unit Plan Framework ............................................................................................................................................. 9
Standards and General Learner Outcome Overview ............................................................................................ 10

Noriega, 2
Assessment Plan Matrix ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Reflection on Assessments .................................................................................................................................. 13
Student Learning Outcomes................................................................................................................................. 16

Pre-Assessment ......................................................................................................................................................16
Summative Assessment..........................................................................................................................................22
Results ....................................................................................................................................................................26
Impact on Student Learning ................................................................................................................................. 31

Lesson 1: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Creation Story ...................................................................................................31
Instructional Plan ..............................................................................................................................................31
Supporting Diverse Learners .............................................................................................................................32
Monitoring Student Learning ............................................................................................................................33
Informing Instructional Practices ......................................................................................................................35
Lesson 2: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Loʻi .....................................................................................................................37
Lesson 3: Photo Essay .............................................................................................................................................43
Reflection on Student Learning and Documented Evidence ................................................................................. 48

Student A (CN) ........................................................................................................................................................49
Student B (NT) ........................................................................................................................................................61
Student C (AL) .........................................................................................................................................................76
References ........................................................................................................................................................... 90
Noriega, 3
Overview of the Assignment
This year, I have been given the opportunity to be placed at Lanakila Elementary School
which is located in the Liliha-Palama area of Honolulu and is a part of the Kaimuki-McKinley-
Roosevelt Complex Area (HSC). Lanakila is a small, but academically strong school with the goal
to have all of their students become college- or career-ready by the time they graduate from
high school. In addition, Lanakila is a Leader in Me school that focuses on the 7 habits of highly
successful people. These habits give students tools they can take with them into the world
both academically and non-academically. Also, Lanakila offers during and after school
intervention classes to assist in student growth in both ELA and Math. In addition, Lanakila has
heterogeneous classes, a Gifted and Talented Program, interventions for struggling learners,
programs for Multilingual Learners (MLLs) and those who are placed in SPED.
At the beginning of every year, MLLs take a test that determines their placement in the
MLL program at the school. Below in Table 1 is a list of the multilingual students in my
classroom and each of their English Language Proficiency Levels across the four language
domains. Each level is based on certain attributes a student is able to perform in each language
domain and it is the averaged to receive the overall English Language Proficiency Level. The
highlighted students will be assessed and addressed throughout the assignment.
Table 1: MLL Data
Listening Speaking Reading Writing English

Student L1 Language
Proficiency
Level
CN Chuukese 3 2 3 3 Emerging
JO Ilocano 5 3 4 4 Expanding
Noriega, 4
AL Cantonese 5 3 5 4 Expanding
NT Cantonese 5 3 4 3 Developing
ZH Mandarin 5 3 5 4 Expanding
The theme of my integrated unit plan was Hawaiian agriculture. In this unit, students
learn about how Hawaiian culture has influenced their agriculture. The students learn this
through reading a moʻolelo and learning about the most important plant in Hawaiʻi’s
agriculture. At the end, students combine everything they learned and apply it into creating a
photo essay where their writing skills are practiced. The social studies standard that was
addressed throughout the unit was SS.3.7.4 Geography: Examine the ways in which people
modify the physical environment and the effects of these changes. Students in the class are not
required to use a specific curriculum, but instruction follows the Hawaii Content performance
standards Benchmark maps (Hawaii Content Performance Standards, 2007). The essential
question for this unit is: How do human activity and environment affect each other? I chose
this because it is important for students to see the unique way in which a particular area of the
world cultivates the land and what they produce. In addition, many students are not from
Hawaiʻi, but are living there. According to Herrell & Jordan (2012), "culture studies provide a
way for teachers to build the classroom community" (p. 68). When students learn about
cultures that differ from their own, they are better able to work with peers who may differ
from them culturally and linguistically. Cultural awareness can mitigate racial bias and
stereotypes.
Noriega, 5
Reflection on Professional Growth
There are many parts that make up being a professional educator. A professional
educator is one that is effective, empathetic, prepared, and knowledgeable. To be effective
means to have the ability to plan and implement instruction while maintaining a safe learning
environment. Planning instruction involves being knowledgeable about the standards, research
based teaching practices, and being able to support diverse learners. In addition, an effective
educator utilizes both formative and summative assessments. Information from assessments
can be used in many ways, such as modifying instruction, identifying ability levels, and
reflection on teaching and student learning. To be empathetic, I must be willing to “see events
from different and nonjudgmental points of view and to appreciate others’ interpretation or
reasons for acting the way they do” (Borich, 2015, p. 6). This means that I should be
empathetic to my students’ behaviors to truly understand how to teach or help them as best I
can. To be prepared means I must be flexible and realistic. Often times, lessons and managing
behavior don’t always go as planned. A professional educator must achieve their goals in the
context of trial and error (Borich, 2015, p. 9). Lastly, to be knowledgeable, I must know the
content knowledge needed to create meaningful and engaging lessons in which students
collaborate, communicate, and effectively learn.
Teaching standards are important for professional educators. Council of Chief State
School Officers (2011) states, a professional educator is based off the Interstate Teacher
Assessment and Consortium (InTASC) Standards. Teaching according to the standards supports
teachers in creating meaningful and engaging lessons that challenge the students at a particular
grade level while also modifying or accommodating to the diverse learners.

Noriega, 6
Professional Standards
For my integrated unit, I chose to focus on comprehensible input according to the SIOP
Lesson Checklist. According to Brantley (2007), comprehensible input is described as input that
is clearly presented in shorter, more understandable speech patterns that are related to the
learner’s background knowledge (p.22). Comprehensible input has 3 parts: Speech, clear
explanations, and the use of a variety of techniques. Speech can be defined as being
appropriate for students’ proficiency level (slower rate, enunciation, and simple sentence
structure for beginners). I believe I met this part of comprehensible input because students
were able to hear and understand me from all areas of the classroom. During the lessons, I
would speak at a voice level for all students to stop, look, and listen. For clear explanations, it
means that academic tasks are clearly explained. I believe this part of the SIOP was a challenge.
In lesson 2, students were asked to go through a series of stations. I initially thought that
having directions printed at each table would be sufficient, however, students were still
confused about what to do. I believe I could’ve taped down the directions on a specific part of
the table for students to refer to instead of the papers being lost in piles. Also, I did project the
directions on the board, but students communicated with me that they weren’t clear enough.
The last part of comprehensible input is being able to use a variety of techniques. The
techniques I used were modeling, visuals, thinking maps/graphic organizers, and the use of
technology. In the first lesson, students were able to organize their thinking in a thinking map
to find the main idea and key details of a Hawaiian creation story. In the second lesson,
students moved through stations and filled out bubble thinking maps while working
Noriega, 7
collaboratively with their groups. In the last lesson, students combined what they learned in
the first and second lesson and displayed their knowledge in a photo essay using google slides.
This semester, I grew into a knowledgeable, effective, and caring educator. During field
each day, I had the opportunity to collaborate with my mentor in creating and planning the
lessons. She allowed me to take the lead in teaching math and eventually guided me into
effectively teaching English Language Arts. Not only was I able to learn from my mentor
teacher, but I also communicated and collaborated with the other teachers in our grade level.
During data teams, I found my voice and together, we assessed student learning and planned
lessons to implement before the next data team meeting. In addition, because I have a focus
on Multilingual learners, I was able to share strategies to be used in the classroom to better
teach our MLLs.
This semester, I was also able to reflect on my teaching practices and adjust my behaviors.
For example, I noticed that my mentor was aware of behaviors and actions around the
classroom more often than I. As a result, I made sure that I walked around more frequently and
scanned the classroom often. During my solo teaching, I noticed that I was inconsistent with
my classroom management and the agenda. I often would present consequences but would
fail to follow through with them. In my future classroom, I will follow through with what I say
to my students and establish predictable routines to ensure stability and a routine.
This semester I had very few opportunities to establish and maintain positive, collaborative
relationships with families and communicate with them curriculum and student progress. In
the beginning of the school year, I was given the opportunity to sit in on the MLLs’ parent
teacher conferences. During these conferences, I advocated for the parents of my MLLs to
Noriega, 8
speak their first language at home as often as possible because if an MLL is proficient in their
first language, they will be proficient in their next acquired language. Also, I expressed that
family read-alouds provide a wealth on contextually rich academic language (Himmele &
Himmele, 2009, p. 26).
Lastly, this semester I was able to develop collaborative relationships with specialists and
other school personal to support students’ learning and well-being. There were many issues
with student behavior this school year and it was especially difficult during the three week
period of my solo teaching. As a result, I was able to develop collaborative relationships with
our vice principal and grade level counselor. We developed different ways to handle behavior
and together implemented behavior contracts for a handful of my students. We even
conducted a grade level talk on bullying.
In the future, I hope to grow more as a professional educator. This semester, I attended
field every day, solo taught for three weeks, participated in weekly faculty meetings, and
learned from mentors and other teachers in my grade level. In the future, I will continue to
seek professional development, consistently reflect on my instruction, create and maintain
relationships with my colleagues and families, be flexible and realistic, and always set goals.
Noriega, 9
Unit Plan Framework
1. Theme and Overview

This unit plan focuses on agriculture within an area of the world. The unit plan is for 3 rd
graders at Lanakila Elementary School. I chose to focus my unit plan on agriculture within
an area of the world to provide students in my class with rich science and social studies
content. I believe that it is important for students to be aware of how human activity
affects the environment. This unit will take place in the second half of the third quarter
around February or March of 2019.
2. Essential Question
The essential question for this unit is: How do human activity and environment affect each
other? I selected this essential question because it is important for students to understand
how human actions affect the environment around them. Students can respond to this
question throughout the unit when they learn how the place they live in utilizes agriculture.
This essential question is important for students to see the unique ways in which a
particular area of the world cultivates the land and what they produce. Students will also
respond to this question in the final lesson where the students create a photo essay.
3. Enduring Understanding(s)
Then enduring understanding I would like my students to remember is how culture
influences agriculture. Students will also remember how the part of the world in which they
live, farms. By acknowledging a different culture, students gain a sense of multiculturalism.
Once students understand to appreciate other cultures around the world, they might
appreciate the many cultures that make up their classrooms and even their world around
them.
Noriega, 10
Standards and General Learner Outcome Overview
Content Standards Lesson Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Area 1 Agricult Photo
Agricult ure in Essay
ure in Hawaiʻi
Hawaiʻi Loʻi
Creatio
n
Stories
Reading RI.3.1 Ask and answer questions X X X
to demonstrate understanding of
a text, referring explicitly to the
text as the basis for the answers
Writing W.3.2 Write X X
informative/explanatory texts to
examine a topic and convey ideas
and information clearly.
Speaking SL2.2 Recount or describe key X X
and ideas or details from a text read
Listening aloud or information presented
orally or through other media.
SL.3.1 Engage effectively in a X X X
range of collaborative discussions
with diverse partners on grade 3
topics or texts, building on
others’ ideas and expressing their
own clearly.
Language L.3.1 Demonstrate command of X
the conventions of standard
English grammar and usage when
writing or speaking.
L.3.2 Demonstrate command of X
English capitalization,
punctuation, and spelling when
writing.
General GLO #1 Self-Directed Learner X X
Learner GLO #4 Quality Producer X X
Outcome
Social SS.3.7.4 Geography: Examine the X X
Studies ways in which people modify the
Noriega, 11
Content Standards Lesson Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Area 1 Agricult Photo
Agricult ure in Essay
ure in Hawaiʻi
Hawaiʻi Loʻi
Creatio
n
Stories
physical environment and the
effects of these changes.
Noriega, 12
Assessment Plan Matrix

Lesson Guiding Teacher Student Learning Content Area
Question/s Assessment Tool Task
Agriculture in How does culture Checklist Students will be
Hawaiʻi influence able to learn
Creation Stories agriculture? about creation Social
stories that Studies/Reading
pertain to Kalo
and agriculture of
Hawaiʻi through
readings and
using main idea
and key details
Agriculture in Describe how a Checklist Students will be

Hawaiʻi Loʻi is created and able to learn how
Loʻi how taro is grown a Loʻi works with Science/ Social
running water Studies/Reading
How does fresh with the use of
water affect the readings and
use of a Loʻi? visuals.
Students use
stations to
interact with
multiple readings
with graphic
organizers
Writing: Photo Create a photo Rubric Students will be
Essay essay to explain able to create a
what you’ve photo essay as a Social
learned about written response Studies/Writing
agriculture in the to what they’ve
Hawaiian culture. learned about
Hawaiʻiʻs
agriculture with
support from
teacher modeling
and a provided
PowerPoint
template.
Noriega, 13
Reflection on Assessments
Often times, language assessments of MLLs is often left up to specialists in a separate
room, who then summarizes the student’s language proficiency in a single number or level
(Himmele & Himmele, 2009). This information is given to the classroom teacher and in many
cases, there is little or no elaboration that comes with the score. This means that the classroom
teacher doesn’t accommodate to their language proficiency level unless they are given the
proper training or told what to do by the specialist.
When a teacher is put in a situation where a teacher receives a new MLL in their class, it
is important to know how to assess an MLL to determine their language proficiency level. It is
important for teachers to know how to assess language proficiency because it will support
student learning. Some tools that can be used to assess language proficiency are recording
interviews and first-language writing samples (Himmele & Himmele, 2009).
In my unit, I implemented a variety of assessments to assess student learning and guide
my instruction. I used a pre-assessment, multiple formative assessments, and a summative
assessment. The pre-assessment required students to retrieve prior knowledge of Hawaiian
culture and gauge what students already knew about agriculture. I used a checklist to assess
students’ pre-assessment. I initially thought students would show background knowledge of
the content due to having Hawaiian Studies class as part of their specials, however majority of
the students were unable to provide me accurate understanding of the questions. If I were to
teach this unit again, I would provide the students with an article or video first before giving
them the pre-assessment.

Noriega, 14
I used thumbs-up/down/sideways, think-pair-shares, and questioning throughout the
lessons as formative assessments. With these formative assessments, I learned which students
were understanding the material and which students still needed more elaboration on the
content. It allows for low-risk interaction with peers and the content being presented
(Himmele & Himmele, 2009). The students who still needed more support, I would pull into a
group during independent work time and help them with the activity.
The summative assessment was an informative writing piece in the form of a photo
essay/journal. Students created a photo essay to display the knowledge they learned in the
first and second lesson. From the summative assessment, I realize I should have taken the time
to review each slide and the directions from each slide more thoroughly. Students began to ask
me questions about some of the sentence frames which I realized seemed confusing. As a
result, I went over two slides as a class and modeled how I would complete the sentence frame.
In the future, I will create my own photo essay to model for my students, so they know what to
expect.
In conclusion, I will utilize what I learned from this experience to create more effective
assessments and use the data to modify and strengthen my instruction in my future classroom.
For instance, I will implement more formative assessments such as using quick draws, thumbs-
up/down/sideways, and other formative assessments using body language to make my MLLs
more comfortable participating (Himmele & Himmele, 2011). Secondly, I will utilize first-
language writing samples for my MLLs to get a feel for an MLL’s academic development in their
first language. According to Himmele & Himmele (2009), this information is “essential in
understanding what students’ needs are and how best to help them” (p.109). Lastly, I will
Noriega, 15
continue to design assessments that match the language and content objectives I share with my
students. This will allow my students to know exactly what is expect of them.
Noriega, 16
Student Learning Outcomes
Pre-Assessment
There are multiple purposes for Student Learner Outcomes (SLOs). First, SLOs can be
used to set academic goals for what students are expected to achieve by the end of a lesson or
unit. The goals must be based on prior student data and be realistic to what the students can
accomplish. Another purpose for SLOs is to support monitoring and assessing students’
progress over time. By setting baseline data using a pre-assessment, then collecting formative
data, and eventually summative data, a teacher is able to assess student progress over a period
of time and is able to adjust or modify instruction to better support students. Remodeling,
catering to different learning styles, using visuals or scaffolding more are ways a teacher can
modify instruction.
For the social studies SLO, I selected SS.3.7.4 which requires students to examine the
ways in which people modify the physical environment and the effects of these changes. In
relation to my unit, students are examining the way in which Hawaiians use agriculture and
how it relates to their culture. There are no prior progress levels for this benchmark because
students have never been instructed or assessed on agriculture until given the pre-assessment
for my unit. My students should have experience in Hawaiian culture because of the Hawaiian
Studies class they take during specials and where they live which makes the content relevant to
their lives. Unfortunately, all five of the MLLs were well below (see Figure 1). I anticipate the
students will increase to developing proficiency or meeting proficiency after given instruction.
For the reading SLO, I selected benchmark RI.3.1 which requires students to ask and
answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the
Noriega, 17
basis for the answers. In relation to my unit, students are given texts to read and questions to
answer that are based off the texts. These texts will give my students information on Hawaiian
agriculture. Students received prior instruction daily on answering questions using information
from the texts. They have been assessed using their weekly assessments in ELA. Based on that
previous learning, 0 students met expectations, 1 met proficiency, 3 were developing
proficiency, and 1 was well below. The students who were developing and well below struggled
with comprehending the texts and the questions that were being answered. Another challenge
was the concentration and stamina of taking the assessment.
For the pre-assessment, all five students received a well below (see Figure 2). I believe
this was due to my error in not providing an article for students to refer to or read prior to
taking the pre-assessment. The students answered the questions provided to them but was not
given a reading to refer to. I relied on background knowledge and assessed the students to see
what understanding they already had on agriculture and Hawaiian culture.
For the writing SLO, I selected benchmark W.3.2 which requires students to write
informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly. In
relation to my unit, students will be using the information directly learned in the lessons to
create a photo essay. Students received prior instruction on how to find and use information
from sources to support narrative, informative, and opinion writing. They have also been
assessed in their ability to utilize the information in their writing. Based on their previous
learning, 0 students were met expectations, 2 met proficiency, 1 was developing proficiency,
and 1 was well below. The developing and well below students were unable to retain
information from the texts and utilize their notes.

Noriega, 18
In conclusion, SLOs are important for educators because it allows them to implement
lessons that surround important standards that should be focused on. These standards are
typically picked because they relate to what the students need. Through the use of SLOs,
teachers are able to track and assess student progress throughout a unit. As a teacher, I can
use this information to modify my instruction and set new goals to better support my students
in meeting the SLOs.

Noriega, 19
Pre-Assessment SS.3.7.4: Show accurate knowledge of

Hawaiian agriculture
6
5
5
1
0 0 0
0
WB DP MP ME
WB DP MP ME
Figure 1: Pre-Assessment: Students’ progress level for benchmark SS.3.7.4: Show accurate
knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture.
Standard Baseline data Targeted Outcome Outcome
SS.3.7.4 0 students meet with 1 student meet with 0 students meet with
Geography: excellence or 0%. excellence or 20%. excellence or 0%
Examine the 0 students meet 1 student meet with 2 students meet with
ways in which proficiency or 0%. proficiency or 20%. proficiency or 40%.
people 0 students meet 3 students meet 3 students meet
modify the developing proficiency developing proficiency developing proficiency or
physical or 0%. or 60%. 60%.
environment 0 students are well 0 students are well 0 students are well below
and the below to 0%. below or 0%. or 0%.
effects of
these
changes.
The average score for this benchmark The average score for this
was 0 or well below (WB). benchmark is 2.4 or
developing proficiency
(DP).
Student Learning Outcome for SS.3.7.4, Show accurate knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture.
Noriega, 20
Pre-Assessment RI.3.1: Ask and answer questions about

6
5
5
1
0 0 0
0
WB DP MP ME
WB DP MP ME
Figure 2: Pre-Assessment: MLL Students’ progress level for benchmark RI.3.1: Ask and answer
questions about Hawaiian agriculture.
RI.3.1 Ask and 0 students meet with 0 student meet with 0 students meet with
answer excellence or 0%. excellence or 0%. excellence or 0%
questions to 0 students meet 2 students meet 4 students meet with
demonstrate proficiency or 0%. proficiency or 40%. proficiency or 80%.
understanding 0 students meet 3 students meet 1 student meet
of a text, developing proficiency developing developing proficiency or
referring or 0%. proficiency or 60%. 20%.
explicitly to 0 students are well 0 students are well 0 students are well below
the text as the below to 0%. below or 0%. or 0%.
basis for the
answers
The average score for this benchmark The average score for this
was 0 or well below (WB). benchmark is 3.5 or
developing proficiency
(MP).
Student Learning Outcome for RI.3.7.1, Ask and answer questions about Hawaiian agriculture.
Noriega, 21
Pre-Assessment W.3.2: Write informative texts about

6
5
5
1
0 0 0
0
WB DP MP ME
WB DP MP ME
Figure 3: Pre-Assessment: Students’ progress level for benchmark W.3.2: Write informative texts
about Hawaiian agriculture.
W.3.2 Write 0 students meet 0 students meet 0 students meet with

informative/explanatory with excellence or with excellence or excellence or 0%.
texts to examine a topic 0%. 0%.
and convey ideas and 0 students meet 2 students meet 3 students meet with
information clearly. proficiency or 0%. proficiency or 40%. proficiency or 60%.
0 students meet 3 students meet 2 student meet
developing developing developing proficiency
proficiency or 0%. proficiency or 60%. or 40%.
0 students are well 0 students are well 0 students are well
below to 0%. below or 0%. below or 0%.
The average score for this benchmark was 0 or The average score for
well below (WB). this benchmark is 3.2
or meeting proficiency
(MP).
Noriega, 22
Summative Assessment
Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) are important for assessing students. These
benchmarks allow teachers to set goals and monitor them throughout a period of time. It
supports teachers in creating modifications intended on seeing student growth. Summative
assessments may take the form of a short answer/multiple choice test, a performance writing
task, or a tactile task/experiment.
There is tremendous growth for my first SLO. My first SLO focused on the benchmark
show accurate knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture (SS.3.7.4). According to the baseline data, all
5 students were well below. The goal was to have 1 student meet with excellence, 1 student
meet proficiency, 3 students develop proficiency, and 0 students well below. Based on the
summative assessment, students almost met the goal. 0 students were well below, 3 students
were developing proficiency, 2 students met proficiency, and 0 students met excellence.
Although we almost met the goal, the students still showed major growth.
Students also showed significant growth for the second SLO. The second SLO focused
on the benchmark requiring students to ask and answer questions and refer directly back to the
text for the answer (RI.3.1) According to the pre-assessment, all 5 students received a grade of
well below. The goal was to improve this data with 0 students well below, 3 students at
developing proficiency, 2 students meeting proficiency, and 0 students meeting excellence.
Based on the summative assessment, students exceeded this goal. In fact, 0 students were well
below, 1 student was developing proficiency, 4 students met proficiency, and 0 students met
excellence. The average rating was 3.5 or meeting proficiency. Students were able to improve
as a result of multiple opportunities to practice gathering information from a text and

Noriega, 23
organizing their thoughts on a graphic organizer. This practice was not done throughout the
unit; however, it was done in other content areas such as ELA.
Lastly, the students showed growth for the third SLO. The third SLO focused on the
benchmark requiring students to write an informative text (W.3.2). According to the pre-
assessment, all 5 students were well below in the benchmark standard. The goal was to
improve with 0 students well below, 3 students developing proficiency, 2 students meeting
proficiency, and 0 students meeting excellence. Based on the summative assessment, the
students again surpassed this goal. The average rating 3.2 or meeting proficiency with 0
students well below, 2 students developing proficiency, 3 students meeting proficiency, and 0
students meeting excellence. Students were able to utilize their notes, resources, and language
supports to create a writing piece that effectively show their knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture
and meet the benchmark (W.3.2).
Summative Assessment: SS. 3.7.4: Show accurae knowledge

of Hawaiian Agriculture
3.5
3
3
2.4
2.5
2
2
1.5
0.5
0 0
0
Number of Students
WB DP MP ME Benchmark Average
Figure 4: Summative Assessment: Student scores and benchmark average for SS.3.7.4: Show
accurate knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture.
Noriega, 24
Summative Assessment: RI3.1: Ask and answer questions

about Hawaiian agriculture
4.5
4
4
3.5
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
1
0.5
0 0
0
Number of Students
Figure 5: Summative Assessment: Student scores and benchmark average for RI.3.1: Ask and
answer questions about Hawaiian agriculture.
Summative Assessment: W.3.2: Write informative texts

about Hawaiian agriculture
3.5 3.2
3
3
2.5
2
2
1.5
0.5
0 0
0
Number of Students
Figure 6: Summative Assessment: Student scores and benchmark average for W.3.2: Write
informative texts about Hawaiian agriculture.
Noriega, 25
Based on the results of the summative assessment, there are some modification that can be
made to help students meet the SLOs and show more academic growth. According to Figure 4
and 6, some students weren’t able to meet proficiency in showing accurate knowledge of
Hawaiian agriculture (SS.3.7.4) and writing informative texts about Hawaiian culture (W.3.2).
These students were able to show some knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture and present some
information in their summative assessment but didn’t present enough information in detail.
Although I provided a word wall for students to use and consistently reviewed key concepts at
the beginning of lessons, they were not able to provide the most amount of knowledge to meet
expectations. In addition, I provided sentence frames to support their writing. The developing
students didn’t fully utilize this language support and in turn, presented developing writing.
Lastly, (W.3.2) expects students to write an informative text. To support my students, I
provided them with resources and graphic organizers to take notes and organize their thinking.
The students didn’t use everything they wrote from their graphic organizers and incorporate it
in their summative assessment. I believe they might’ve forgot they had that resource or wasn’t
sure how to properly use it.
To help these developing students develop a better understanding of Hawaiian agriculture, I
should have followed the summative assessment with a lesson to review the key concepts of
the Haloa Moʻolelo, different parts of a loʻi, the various uses of kalo, and a review of the key
vocabulary used throughout the unit. In the future, I will review the word wall daily to clear up
any misconceptions students may still have. It will be a reminder that students should utilize
the resource that was provided to them. Also, I will organize students into small ability groups.
In the lessons, I had the students work in their table groups or their choice of a partner. While
Noriega, 26
having the option for student choice is more engaging, ability grouping will allow me to assist
groups at the same level and provide them with the supports that are appropriate for their
learning needs. Lastly, I will model the langauge supports more efficiently. Many students
recieved a grade of DP in writing informative texts (W.3.2). I provided sentence frames and
guiding questions to help them present their imformation for their summative assessment,
however I believe I could’ve modeled how to properly use the sentence frames by creating my
own photo essay for students to follow. I would create a scaffolded lesson where I use my
resources (word wall, graphic organizers, readings) and take information from them to support
my summative assessment.
In conclusion, SLOs support educators to set goals as well as measure student learning.
With the use of SLOs, teachers can provide more meaningful and effective instruction.
Ultimately, creating SLOs motivates an educator to provide the best possible instruction to not
only see growth in their students, but also within themselve as educators.
Results
Many educators utilize SLOs as a summative assessment. SLOs show impact on student
learning and performance across grade levels and all content areas. This data is comparing that
from the baseline preassessment and the summative assessment, which shows student growth
resulting from a unit of study.
The first SLO was based on the benchmark for showing accurate knowledge of Hawaiian
agriculture (SS.3.7.4). According to Figure 7, 0 students met with excellence, met with
proficiency, or developed proficiency, which contrasts the data for the summative assessment.
In the summative, 2 students met proficiency and 3 students developed proficiency. In the
Noriega, 27
summative, the results showed the students received scores in the middle levels. Although 0
students met with excellence in the summative assessment, they made strides because
according to Figure 7, all 5 students were well below at first.
The second SLO was based on the benchmark for asking and answering questions (RI.3.1).
In the pre-assessment, all students scored at well below. This is evident in Figure 8. After the
unit, the students showed growth. Only 1 student was graded at developing proficiency, 4
students met proficiency, and 0 students met with excellence.
The third SLO was based on the benchmark for writing an informative text (W.3.2). In the
pre-assessment, all students scored at well below. This is evident in Figure 9. Students
improved tremendously since the beginning of the unit. In fact, after the summative, 3
students were scored at developing proficiency and 2 students met proficiency. These results
show the students have made growth because this standard was one each student was
struggling with.
5
5
3
3
2
2
0 0 0 0 0
0
Pre-Assessment Summative Assessment
WB DP MP ME
Noriega, 28
Figure 7: Comparison between Pre-Assessment and Summative Assessment for SS3.7.4: Show
accurate knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture.
5
5
4
4
1
1
0 0 0 0 0
0
Pre-Assessent Summative
WB DP MP ME
Figure 8: Comparison between Pre-Assessment and Summative Assessment for RI 3.1: Ask and
answer questions about Hawaiian agriculture.
5
5
3
3
2
2
0 0 0 0 0
0
Pre-Assessment Summative
WB DP MP ME
Figure 9: Comparison between Pre-Assessment and Summative Assessment for W.3.2: Write
informative texts about Hawaiian agriculture.
Noriega, 29
Overall, I was able to meet the Student Learning Outcomes for this Hawaiian agriculture
unit. For the first SLO, show accurate knowledge of Hawaiian agriculture (SS.3.7.4), students
were able to show growth for each of the 5 students. According to Figure 7, all students scored
at well below in the pre-assessment. After learning throughout the unit, each student scored
developing proficiency or meeting proficiency. I believe there was growth because I initially
believed the students had some prior knowledge on Hawaiian agriculture, however I was
wrong. Through the different activities I conducted and the information I presented, the
students were able to gain more knowledge on Hawaiian agriculture.
For the second SLO, asking and answering questions on Hawaiian agriculture (RI.3.1),
students also made tremendous growth. The students had no prior knowledge on Hawaiian
agriculture, so they weren’t able to answer questions regarding the subject. This SLO was
important because it pertained to MLLs’ reading, speaking, and listening language domains.
Throughout the lessons, I used strategies such as sentence frames to support MLLs’ speaking to
answer questions. In addition, I consistently reviewed important concepts. With these
strategies, all 5 MLLs were able to grow to where only 1 student was developing proficiency and
4 students met proficiency.
For the final SLO, write an informative text on Hawaiian agriculture (W.3.2), students
showed growth, however from the data in Figure 9, there are improvements that I can make to
see further development in this SLO. According to the summative assessment, 2 students
scored at developing proficiency and 3 students met proficiency. Students were able to earn
these grades due to the consistent feedback from myself, the guiding questions and sentence
frames given to the students in the photo essay template, and the graphic organizers that were
Noriega, 30
used throughout the lessons. Although my instructional practices worked, I can still be more
effective. Some students’ graphic organizers were more effective than others. To assist
students better with taking notes, I could differentiate the graphic organizers by having some
with sentence frames or fill in the blanks. This would guide my MLLs to look for the right
answers and thereby guide their writing in their informative text using complete sentences
directly taken from their graphic organizers.
Analyzing data collected over time on the same benchmark helps a teacher to understand
students’ progress. More specifically, teachers can utilize this data to determine if students
need more support or if they need more of a challenge. In my Hawaiian agriculture unit, I could
tell if students were understanding Hawaiian agriculture (SS.3.7.4) by asking and answering
questions throughout the lessons (RI.3.1) and writing an informative text (W.3.2) at the end of
the unit. Although I was able to analyze the data collected over time, I could improve my
assessments by analyzing the data sooner rather than later. I could have found more insights
by analyzing the data right after the lesson instead of days after. From this experience, I
learned the importance of setting goals (SLOs), monitoring student learning over time, and
analyzing the effective and ineffective practices used to either support or hinder student
success. As a future teacher, I will work on incorporating data to inform my instruction because
I understand the importance of it.

Noriega, 31
Impact on Student Learning
Lesson 1: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Creation Story
In this lesson, the focus was to introduce Hawaiian agriculture by reading a moʻolelo or
creation story that tells of the most sacred plant in Hawaiʻi. This lesson would give students
practice in finding important information to determine a connection between agriculture and
Hawaiian culture. Based on the pre-assessment, I knew all the students had no prior
knowledge on Hawaiian moʻolelo, so this lesson would allow students to use little of their prior
knowledge.
Instructional Plan
I taught two different strategies to help students understand the main idea of Haloa. The
first strategy was read- aloud plus. This strategy is especially effective when reading a tough
text. Considering a Hawaiian moʻolelo is new to the students, it’s imperative that I scaffold the
reading to where they can comprehend what the story is about. Herrell and Jordan (2012)
states, “Read-aloud plus involves the teacher reading text aloud to students while adding visual
support and periodically paraphrasing” (p. 155). Students are more engaged and comprehend
the reading when it is read aloud to them. This strategy was effective because I noticed
students were engaged in the story and was able to answer my questions such as, “who was
Haloa and why was he important to the Hawaiians?” I received many raised hands even from
those who typically don’t participate. The students were accurately able to answer my
questions and even use key vocabulary such as the word “ʻAina” meaning “land” in Hawaiian.
The next strategy was pulling small groups and allowing students to work with partners.
This strategy has been effective all year in my field placement because my students choose
Noriega, 32
partners that typically help them and keep them focused on their work. I also chose this
strategy because it is effective with MLLs. According to Herrell and Jordan (2012), it is effective
because of the, “opportunities for verbal interaction and support it provides” (p. 30). In
addition, I was able to pull small group of MLLs because I know they needed more support
finding a main idea and key details. The small group was effective because I was able to direct
students to the important parts of the moʻolelo. At first, students would point out details in the
story that were irrelevant to the main idea such as stating who Papa, Mother Earth is.
Eventually, the students were able to notice how the title of the creation story affects what the
main idea might be about.
Supporting Diverse Learners
The academic language supports were mostly effective in this lesson because the terms
were very limited. The academic terms students needed to understand were Haloa, Wakea,
Hoʻohokulani, ʻAina, and Kalo. The first three terms are names of people in the story, ʻAina
means “land,” and kalo is the plant that Haloa turned into. It was critical for students to
understand these terms because they would be utilized in the summative assessment. For
example, the summative assessment asks the student to recount the main idea and key
supporting details of the Hawaiian creation story they read.
The students were provided a word wall and visuals. The word wall served as a resource to
the students in remembering what key vocabulary they needed to remember throughout the
unit. The visuals provided them a connection between the English word and the picture that
represents it. The use of visuals is also known as visual scaffolding (Herrell & Jordan, 2012).
The use of visuals was effective because students recalled information and would cite the
Noriega, 33
picture they remember seeing. For example, I provided a visual of a baby underneath the Earth
and a kalo plant growing above the land. This visual signified Haloa and Kalo because from the
death of Haloa, became the first kalo plant in Hawaiʻi.
In this lesson I differentiated instruction by pulling small groups. This was effective with my
MLLs because they received additional teacher support that the rest of the class wasn’t offered.
From small groups, the MLLs received help in gaining a deeper comprehension of the reading. I
was available to answer questions and even develop complete and comprehendible sentences.
Together, we developed a main idea for the moʻolelo and I assisted them in finding two key
supporting details. In the end, the students were able to find a third key supporting detail to
complete their graphic organizer.
Monitoring Student Learning
The student learning outcomes for this lesson were to show accurate knowledge of
Hawaiian agriculture by reading a Hawaiian creation story and finding the main idea and key
supporting details that relate the creation story to Hawaiian agriculture. Students were
expected to reread the story by themselves or with a partner and complete and main idea and
key details graphic organizer to fully understand the meaning of the creation story or moʻolelo.
I used the monitoring plan to check if students were making progress for the student learning
outcomes during the whole group read aloud and independent work time. For example, while
reading the moʻolelo as a class, I would stop and ask the students questions such as, “what
characters were introduced in the moʻolelo and why are they important?” After students
shared their answers with their partner next to them, one student shared, “The character Papa,
Mother Earth was introduced.” I explained to the student that this answer is correct because
Noriega, 34
Papa was introduced, but the student failed to notice that Papa wasnʻt fully relevant in the rest
of the moʻolelo. Another student shared, “The character, Hoʻohokulani, is important because
she is the mother of Haloa who she cried on his grave and he ended up being the first kalo.” I
then praised this student and explained that her answer was correct because she was able to
find the important part of the story which is mainly about how Haloa is the first kalo plant and
the Hawaiians worship this belief.
The teacher assessment tool I used for this lesson was a checklist which allowed me to
assess whether a student was able to recount key supporting details and write a main idea for
the moʻolelo by completing the graphic organizer. The checklist was an effective way to gather
fata about students’ learning of the standards because I was able to see which students were
not able to complete the graphic organizer and which students were able to. I wouldn’t modify
this assessment tool because it was an easy and quick way for me to assess where my students
were according to the standard and allowed me to see if I needed to review the content with
specific students.
Before this lesson, my students had multiple opportunities to practice finding the main idea
and key supporting details in a story. Typically, every week or every other week, Wonders asks
students to read a story and figure out the main idea and provide key details. The students are
always guided by the teacher to find at least one or two key details as a class and then the
students work independently or with a partner to complete the rest of the graphic organizer.
The students perform well when the reading is an informative text, however they do struggle
with finding the main idea of narratives. Because the moʻolelo was a narrative, the students
struggled more to find the main idea and key details. After I allowed students to work
Noriega, 35
independently or with a partner to complete their graphic organizer, I noticed some students
were struggling. To have an effective close to the lesson, I brought the class back together and
asked the students to share some main ideas and key details they came up with by themselves
or with a partner. I then wrote their answers on the board. After all the students listened to
what their peers found, I released the students to continue working and I noticed the students
who were struggling were finally able to complete their graphic organizers with the support
from their peers’ answers.
Informing Instructional Practices
Based on the data, the MLLs all received grades ranging from WB, DP, and MP. Those
who received a grade of WB chose to not complete the task even when offered help from peers
or teachers. The students who received DP were successful in finding the main idea. They
understood that the moʻolelo was about Haloa and how he was the first kalo plant in Hawaiʻi.
However, they encountered challenges when they needed to find key details that support their
main idea. I noticed they picked parts of the moʻolelo that didn’t relate to the main idea.
In future lessons, I could do better to differentiate for my MLLs. More students were
developing proficiency than they were meeting proficiency. The students who were developing
were having a hard time either finding the main idea of the moʻolelo or finding key supporting
details. I could differentiate by pulling a small group of MLLs who typically struggle more and
have them complete the graphic organizer with me instead of allowing them to work with just a
partner independently. By working in a small group, I can reread the moʻolelo with them and
ask them questions while reading to ensure comprehension. I can also guide them to the
correct answers when finding key supporting details. In addition, I can remind students to use
Noriega, 36
the skills and strategies they learned from Wonders and incorporate it in the social studies
lesson because although it’s a different content area, the skills and strategies can still be used. I
believe many students forget this important concept.

Noriega, 37
Lesson 2: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Loʻi
In this lesson, students were introduced to what a loʻi is, the different parts that make
up a loʻi, what is produced, and the different uses for kalo. This lesson allowed students to
make the connection between Hawaiian moʻolelo to Hawaiian agriculture. Based on the
previous lesson, I knew the students had a steady understanding of what kalo is. This lesson
was meant to support students in seeing how kalo is used currently and how it is still important
to Hawaiian culture. I originally planned for this lesson to be a two day lesson, however time
was limited, and we had to split the lesson into four separate days.
Instructional Plan
In this lesson, I taught two different strategies to help students develop a general
understanding of a loʻi and the typical uses of kalo. The first strategy was learning centers.
Herrell and Jordan (2012) states, “Learning centers are places in the classroom where students
engage in hands-on activities that allow them to obtain additional experiences in using new
skills…” (p.37). This strategy is rarely used in my classroom. The only experience my students
have had with centers was when we used it during Response to Intervention (RTI) for math
centers. The students responded negatively to it, but I felt it would be beneficial to try it again.
For this lesson, it was not effective because the timing allowed for the lesson was limited. I
initially planned for the lesson to take two days and for students to rotate through two centers
a day. Instead, we barely had time to get through one center. In addition, because centers is a
rarely practiced strategy in my classroom, the students were still getting acclimated to moving
throughout the classroom and doing multiple activities. The rotation of the centers was
Noriega, 38
difficult. In the future, taking the time to practice rotating would be beneficial to see more
success with this strategy.
The second strategy that was used was visual scaffolding. Visual scaffolding is, “an
approach in which the language used in instruction is made more understandable by the display
of drawings or photographs that allow students to hear English words and connect them to the
visual images being displayed” (Herrell & Jordan, 2012, p. 26). This strategy was used within
the centers. For instance, station #2 was about the uses of kalo. At the station, a diagram of
kalo was printed out labeling the different parts of it. The students were able to visually see the
part of the kalo and the direct name for it. Also, on station #2 was a table that I created with
the name of the part of the kalo and the different uses for that part. I provided photographs of
what could be used from kalo to support English words on the table.
The academic language, supports, and modalities had negative results in this lesson. I first
focused on pairing MLLs with NES within their table group. This is critical with MLLs because
they are receiving the support from NES to help guide their writing and understand the activity
in kid friendly language. This was effective in some groups where the NES and MLL worked well
together and were self-directed in getting the work at the station completed. In other groups,
this was ineffective because the MLL was not self-directed and the NES refused to work with
anyone else. When I witnessed groups that didn’t work well together, I used positive language
to try and persuade and support the students working together. This didn’t work and instead, I
should have taken the time to switch students around to be in groups where more
collaboration could take place.

Noriega, 39
Students used all language modalities. The supports given were visuals, graphic organizers,
and the use of technology. The supports could have been improved because my students could
have benefited from more support with the graphic organizers. For each station, I provided the
students with a blank bubble map. Tomlinson (2017) claimed that differentiation provides
specific alternatives for learners to learn as deeply as possible and as quickly as possible. I
could have differentiated the bubble maps at each station where there could have been
sentence frames to start an idea or fill in the blanks so the MLLs knew what important
information to look for, especially on the stations where the students were asked to explore
websites.
The student learning outcomes for this lesson were to learn about Hawaiian agriculture,
specifically focusing on a Loʻi and Kalo. The students were expected to take notes using a
bubble map graphic organizer and fill it out according to questions that are asked at each
station. I used the monitoring plan to check if students were making progress for the student
learning outcomes during independent work time, while checking students’ graphic organizers
after the lesson. For my feedback, I was specific to inform students exactly how to improve
their work. For example, I read what they wrote in one of their bubbles and asked questions
like, “You wrote that the kahawai is a part of a loʻi, but can you describe what the kahawai is
and how it’s important to the loʻi?” The student was then able to look back at the information
from the website and add to his bubble map.
The teacher assessment tool I used for this lesson was a checklist that allowed me to assess
completion and quality of the notes my students took. This assessment tool was effective in
Noriega, 40
gathering data about the students’ learning of the standards because it allowed me to see
which stations I needed to review more as a whole group and which stations the students
learned enough information on. Because the assessment tool was effective, I would not modify
it.
Before this lesson, students had not had much practice learning through stations and when
they were given the opportunity to work with stations, the motion of rotating and experiencing
different activities was challenging for the students. In this lesson, the students had that same
problem. I believe I jumped too fast and instead, I could have allowed the students to just
simply practice the movement from station to station and allow them time to preview the
material at each station for a couple of minutes. Although I explained the directions for each
station, I believe the students could have benefited from me modeling the station as a visual
before they started the task themselves.
During the closing of my lesson, I provided a summary and review of the content and
language objectives. I reviewed the stations that most students were having challenges with
and allowed the students to help add vocabulary to our word wall. I checked for understanding
by asking students questions about what they learned in each station and then followed up by
adding more information that they failed to present. The students were allowed to add to their
bubble maps during this review time, however I feel like I could have used a total participation
technique such as using white boards and holding up answers to make this review more
engaging.
Noriega, 41
Based on the data, the students received grades ranging from WB, DP, and MP. The
students that received a grade of WB were either unfocused or the directions for each station
were unclear and they had misconceptions. These students had incomplete bubble map
graphic organizers and needed assistance understanding the content. The students that
received a grade of DP had successes in completing some of the bubble map graphic organizers
and received teacher support. They encountered challenges with understanding the directions
and recounting important information from the texts and other sources. Lastly, the students
who received a grade of MP were successful in completing all 3 required bubble map graphic
organizers. They provided themselves with important information in order to be successful in
having the knowledge of the content being taught through the stations. Although the students
received meeting proficiency grades, they didn’t receive meeting excellence or ME grades due
to the fact that they didn’t complete the unrequired fourth bubble map graphic organizer.
In future lessons, I could differentiate many aspects of the station activity. One part I could
differentiate is the graphic organizers used to organize and take notes for each station. In the
lesson, I provided the students with blank bubble maps. The blank bubble maps were effective
for NES, but I noticed the MLLs in the class were struggling with taking notes. In the future, I
can differentiate each bubble map according to what task is being asked to perform by the
student at each station. For example, I could’ve included sentence frames to provide MLLs
support in their writing. Also, I will include guiding questions in each bubble to help students
find the important information. Another way I could’ve differentiated the stations is, I could
Noriega, 42
provide students time to practice the motion of rotating. I believe the students had difficulties
moving around the classroom and having to complete multiple tasks.

Noriega, 43
Lesson 3: Photo Essay
In this lesson, students were asked to create a photo essay to present all the knowledge
they’ve learned throughout the unit. The lesson required the students to use all the resources
that were given to them and write an informative text explaining what they knew about
Hawaiian agriculture. In this lesson, students write in detail and meet the learning and
language objectives which hare directly aligned with the benchmark standards.
Instructional Plan
In this lesson, I taught two different strategies to help students complete their summative
assessment on Hawaiian agriculture. The first strategy was to use sentence frames. Sentence
frames benefit all learners because it provides enough structure to guide students, while
allowing them to be creative in what they create. In the photo essay template, I provided
sentence frames for students to use which acted as directions and a guide to support their
writing. For instance, I included the sentence frame, “The main idea of ______. One key detail
is _______. Another key detail is ______.” These sentence frames asked the students to
recount information from the moʻolelo or creation story that they read in the first lesson. This
strategy was effective because many students took advantage of it in their writing. Also, they
have experience using sentence frames because I introduced it them when talking about
strategies in math as well as using it as a start to their morning journals.
The next strategy was using graphic organizers. The students were asked to utilize their
graphic organizers created in the two lessons to support their work in the summative
assessment. In order to be successful in their summative assessment, the students needed to
complete their work in the two lessons. If their work was not complete or quality, they would
Noriega, 44
need to go back to the resources I provided them and look for information. For those who
decided to produce quality work in the two lessons, they were able to use their graphic
organizers as a support writing an informative text about Hawaiian agriculture.
The academic language, supports, and modalities were effective in this lesson. I supported
diverse learners by pairing them with NES. For MLLs that needed additional support other than
sentence frames and graphic organizers, I paired them with NES and together, they worked on
the same photo essay. The MLLs that I chose to pair with NES were based on the completion of
their work in the two lessons and they necessary need for additional support. This was
effective because I chose to pair the MLL with an NES that would challenge the MLL to do their
part in the work and help to support the MLL’s understanding of the content.
Students used all language modalities. The supports given was a word wall with visuals and
allowing the students to use their graphic organizers from the two lessons to support their
summative assessment. These supports were effective. Students were able to utilize the
vocabulary from the word wall and incorporate it in their writing. One vocabulary term I wish I
emphasized and explained more was agriculture. The students understood the overarching
meaning of it and how it related to Hawaiian agriculture, however, they struggled with coming
up with their own definition that didn’t include adding information about Hawaiians and kalo.
Next time, I will spend more time on agriculture alone and then move on to Hawaiian
agriculture.
Noriega, 45
The student learning outcomes for this lesson were to write an informative text showcasing
what the students learned about Hawaiian agriculture. Students were expected to use the
graphic organizers and knowledge learned from the lessons and create a photo essay with
visuals that represent the content. I used the monitoring plan to check if students were making
progress for the student learning outcomes during independent work time while checking the
progress of the students’ photo essays after each day they worked on it. After reading their
photo essays after each day they worked on it, I would provide feedback to students who need
more guidance in being successful in completing their photo essay. For example, I noticed one
student having misconceptions about what to write on the slide regarding what they learned
during the station activity. I advised the student to use the bubble maps to guide their writing
and to pick two stations that most interested them and to write about those stations.
The teacher assessment tool that was used to gather data about students’ learning of the
standards was a checklist and rubric. The checklist was used to determine which students were
finished and which students needed more time. The rubric was used to grade the photo essays
once the students were finished. The rubric was effective because the criteria related to the
standards that were focused on for the summative assessment. Although the rubric gave me a
picture of how students performed according to the standard, I believe I could’ve differentiated
the rubric to accommodate MLLs. In the future, I will use a different assessment tool to assess
MLLs. In addition, although the rubric was effective, I failed to share the rubric with my
students in order to show them exactly what is expected of them. By seeing the rubric, the
Noriega, 46
students know what they need to accomplish in order to be successful in their summative
assessment. Also, I could have students peer assess each other’s photo essays.
Prior to this lesson, students have had no experience creating photo essays, however they
have had experience creating a google slides presentation when they created a presentation on
animal adaptations. This allowed me to have confidence in my students to create an
informative text summative assessment on google slides.
During the closing, students shared their photo essay with their classmates. I used this
activity to allow students to share their work with their peers and help determine if students
were able to answer the supporting question, making progress toward learning the enduring
understanding, and meeting the expectations of the content and language objectives. The
students work indicated they were mostly able to answer the supporting question. I could have
had the students present their photo essays to their table groups if I had more time. This would
allow students to assess each other on their work and allow me to determine if the students
met the student learning outcomes.
Based on the data, the students received grades of DP and MP, with zero students
receiving a grade of ME. The MLLs who received grades of DP were assigned to complete the
photo essay with a NES. I paired them with a NES because their work in the two lessons leading
up to the summative assessment were incomplete and didn’t have the important information
necessary to be successful in the summative assessment. The NES was able to support the MLL
by sharing notes and helping them in all language domains, especially reading and writing. The
MLLs that earned a grade of MP were able to successfully answer the prompts on each slide of
Noriega, 47
the photo essay and recount important information to write an informative text that highlights
Hawaiian agriculture. I noticed they were having challenges with creating comprehensible and
complete sentences although I provided sentence frames and guiding questions. Overall, they
didn’t receive a grade of ME because of the spelling and grammar errors in their summative
assessment.
In the future, I can differentiate instruction for this lesson by providing more formative
checks and model examples of what I expect from the students. While students were given
independent work time to complete their summative assessment, I walked around to help
students who were having misconceptions, however I could’ve taken more formative
assessments to determine exactly where students were struggling. By taking more formative
assessments, I could have retaught concepts as a whole group to clear up misconceptions and
answer questions. In addition, although I provided a template of the photo essay with sentence
frames and guiding questions, I failed to create a teacher example of the photo essay to present
to the students. By providing an example, the students would be shown the quality of work
that is expected of them. Also, they would see what they are supposed to accomplish on each
google slide which would act as a visual aid that would’ve been helpful for MLLs.
Noriega, 48
Reflection on Student Learning and Documented Evidence
An effective teacher ensures they are aware of the importance of assessing student learning
and collecting evidence of student work. When a teacher assesses student learning with the
use of formative or summative data, they can utilize this information to make better
instruction. For example, if a teacher notices many of the students are not understanding the
content/strategy or making the same mistake, the teacher can take the time to address these
misconceptions or modify her instruction to accommodate the students who are struggling.
Assessing work and collecting evidence allows for “meaningful conversations about teaching
and valid evaluations of teaching (Danielson, 2008). This means that student work reflects a
teacher’s ability. The student work can be looked over by mentors or colleagues to then
provide feedback to the teacher. This feedback will allow the teacher to grow and become a
more effective educator.

Noriega, 49
Student A (CN)
I selected Student A (CN) because he is one of the lowest MLLs in my field experience
classroom. I wanted to see what he can do with support and accommodations throughout a
unit. He is well below in all content areas (ELA, math, science, and social studies). Student A
(CN) is at a 2nd grade level for all content areas. In class, he is unfocused and often has to be
redirected. Student A (CN) is a community contributor and always offers his assistance to his
classmates. Student A (CN) has an English Language Proficiency Level of Emerging and has an
ACCESS overall score level of 2.8 in 2018. Since 2017, Student C digressed and has a loss of -0.3.
He is also from Chuuk and is bilingual in Chuukese and English. Although he speaks both
languages, he is not proficient in his L1 and L2. Student C has a difficult time with learning his
multiplication facts. Student A (CN) has difficulty comprehending readings and answering
questions.
Student A (CN) attempted to utilize all academic language supports to complete the
tasks, however his lack of motivation drove him to have incomplete work in the first two
lessons. In the first lesson, Student A (CN) was pulled into a small group to read the creation
story and find the main idea and key supporting details. While the other students responded
well to the extra support, Student A (CN) refused to do his work. Student A (CN) did apply
himself when we read the creation story together and even highlighted important parts. In the
second lesson, Student A (CN)
For the summative assessment, I paired Student A (CN) with a Native English Speaker
(NES) to complete the photo essay. Due to the lack of notes Student A (CN) didn’t take
throughout the lessons, the NES was able to support him in completing the photo essay. They
Noriega, 50
were instructed to collaborate and work together. As they were working, I made sure to check
in on the pair to ensure Student A (CN) was contributing an equal share in the project. I noticed
the NES effectively share notes with Student A (CN).
Overall, Student A (CN) was able to show he was developing proficiency in all standards
with the assistance of the NEP. Across the unit, Student A (CN) was to develop in the 3
benchmark standards. However, his level of understanding is unclear in his ability to answer
the supporting questions, meet the content and language standards, and progress in the
enduring understanding with assistance of peers and myself. In the beginning, Student A (CN)
received a WB in all 3 standards, however by the end of the summative assessment, Student A
(CN) received DP in SS.3.7.4, RI.3.1, and W.3.2. Student A (CN) received a grade of DP in all
standards because he received support from a NES. According to his summative assessment,
Student A (CN) still needs support with spelling, grammar, and punctuation. The NES had to
support Student A (CN) in fixing mistakes. In the future, Student A (CN) will work
independently, but will continue to receive language supports and helpful words of motivation.
Student A (CN) will also be pulled into small groups during independent work time to ensure he
is focused and receiving support.

Noriega, 51
Student A’s Assessment Data Table:

Student A’s benchmark grades for each lesson
Content Standards Pre- Lesson Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Area Assess 1 Agricult (Summa
ment Agricult ure in tive)
ure in Hawaiʻi Photo
Hawaiʻi Loʻi Essay
Creatio
n
Stories
Reading RI.3.1 Ask and answer questions WB WB WB DP
Writing W.3.2 Write DP
Speaking SL2.2 Recount or describe key DP WB DP
SL.3.1 Engage effectively in a WB
own clearly.
Language L.3.1 Demonstrate command of DP
L.3.2 Demonstrate command of DP
writing.
General GLO #1 Self-Directed Learner WB DP
Learner GLO #4 Quality Producer WB WB MP
Outcome
Social SS.3.7.4 Geography: Examine the WB WB WB DP
Noriega, 52

Creatio
n
Stories
Noriega, 53
Pre-Assessment: What do you already know about agriculture and Hawaiian agriculture?
Figure 10: Work from pre-assessment. Student A (CN)’s pre-assessment demonstrates that he
was unable to recount any background information that he might have relating to agriculture or
Hawaiian culture.
Pre-Assessment: What do you already know about agriculture and Hawaiian culture?
SS.3.7.4: Show accurate RI.3.1: Ask and answer W.3.2: Write informative
knowledge of Hawaiian questions to demonstrate text
agriculture. understanding of a text,
refering directly from the
text.
WB WB WB
Noriega, 54
Lesson 1: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi Creation Stories
Figure 11: Work from Lesson 1.: Reading and Graphic Organizer: This student’s highlighting
shows that he was able to find important details in a text.
(SL.2.2) Student A (CN) received a DP for benchmark SL.2.2 because he found key details from a
text. In the work above, Student A (CN) failed to complete his graphic organizer showing 3 key
details and a main idea for the story.
Noriega, 55
(SS.3.7.4) Due to this, Student A (CN) received a WB for benchmark SS.3.7.4 which expects the
student to compare Hawaiian creation story to agriculture. He also received WB for RI.3.1 to
ask and answer questions and refer directly to the text. Student A (CN) failed to provide key
details from the text.
(SL.3.1) He also received WB in SL.3.1 which describes a student being able to engage in
collaborative discussions with diverse partners and GLO #4 quality producer. During the lesson,
Student A (CN) chose to not finish his work.
Lesson 1: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Creation Stories

SS.3.7.4: Show RI.3.1: Ask and SL.2.2: Find key SL 3.1: Engage GLO #4: Quality
accurate answer questions details from a in Producer
knowledge of to demonstrate text. collaborative
Hawaiian understanding of a discussions
agriculture. text, refering with diverse
directly from the partners.
text.
WB WB DP WB WB
Noriega, 56
Lesson 2: Agriculture in Hawaiʻi: Loi
Student A (CN)’s lack of notes during a 3 day stations activity is evidence as to why he received
a grade of WB in all standards addressed below. During the stations, Student A (CN) was with
his group and followed them through the stations but refused to complete any of his work. This
lesson helped me in making my decision in pairing him with a Native English Speaker (NES) for
the summative assessment.

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask and SL2.2: Find SL 3.1: GLO #4: GLO #1:
Show answer key details Engage in Quality Self-
accurate questions to from a text. collaborative Producer directed
knowledge of demonstrate discussions learner
Hawaiian understanding with diverse
agriculture. of a text, partners.
refering directly
from the text.
WB WB WB WB WB WB
Noriega, 57

Noriega, 58
Noriega, 59
Criteria ME MP DP WB
Knowledge from Student is able Student is able Student is able Student is not
the lessons to provide vast to recount some to complete able to recount
amount of information almost all photo information
SS.3.7.4 information from the lesson essay with little from the
RI.3.1 into the photo amount of lessons into the
essay information photo essay
from the lessons
Grammar and No errors Minimal errors Student makes a Many errors

spelling throughout the throughout the handful of errors throughout the
photo essay photo essay throughout the photo essat
L.3.1 photo essay
L.3.2
Completion Student is able Student is able Student is Student is not

to use creativity to complete almost able to able to
W.3.2 to complete photo essay with complete the complete the
photo essay with pictures and photo essay with photo essay
pictures and information some pictures
information from the lessons
Photo Essay and rubric from Lesson 3 (Summative Assessment): This student completed the
summative assessment with Native English Speaker (NES) as his partner. It should be noted
that the NES received a higher grade than Student A (CN). Student A (CN) made a tremendous
amount of growth from the first two lessons to the summative assessment. To ensure Student
A (CN) did his share of work, I checked in on him and placed him and the NES in a part of the
room where I could closely monitor his work.
(SS.3.7.4) Overall, Student A (CN) received a grade of DP in the benchmark standard SS.3.7.4
which describes the student is able to compare Hawaiian creation story to their agriculture.
This is evident in the first and last slides where Student A (CN) compares the two.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2)

In addition, Student A (CN) received a DP for benchmark RI.3.1 and SL.2.2 because he was able
to identify key details from the text.
(L.3.1) & (L.3.2) Student A (CN) still needs practice with using correct spelling, grammar, and
punctuation, which is why he received a grade of DP for L.3.1 and L.3.2.
Noriega, 60

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask W.3.2: SL2.2: L.3.1: L.3.2: GLO #4: GLO
Show and answer Write Find Correct Correct Quality #1:
accurate questions to informativ key usage of usage of Produce Self-
knowledg demonstrate e text detail standar standard r directe
e of understandin s d English d
Hawaiian g of a text, from English capitalizatio learner
agricultur refering a gramma n,
e. directly from text. r punctuation,
the text. and spelling.
DP DP DP DP DP DP MP DP
Noriega, 61
Student B (NT)
I selected Student B (NT) because he is one of the most self-directed MLLs in my field
placement classroom. His strengths are in math and science. He is currently making strides in
English Language Arts. Student B (NT) has an English Language Proficiency Level of Developing
and has an ACCESS overall score level of 3.7 in 2018. Since 2017 score, he has made a gain of
+0.5 Student B (NT) struggles with producing comprehensible sentences with correct grammar
and using CALP vocabulary words. He listens to the speaker, but rarely contributes to whole
group and small group conversations. I chose his work because he is a striving learner.
Throughout this unit, Student B (NT) showed interest in the topics and produced developing
work. With motivation, Student B (NT) was able to accomplish and finish all of his work.
However, he struggled when writing the summative assessment independently. It wasn’t
finishing the summative assessment that was the struggle however it was putting his ideas into
complete and comprehensible sentences that he was struggling with.
Student B (NT) consistently utilized all academic language supports to develop his
understanding of Hawaiian agriculture. Student B (NT) read the texts, took quality notes, and
listened during lessons. However, Student B (NT) struggled with participating and his writing.
His level of understanding is evident in his ability to answer the supporting questions, meet the
content and language standards, and progress in the enduring understanding with assistance of
peers and myself. Based on Student B’s Assessment Data Table, Student B (NT) met with
proficiency in almost all the standards. He received MP in RI.3.1, DP in W.3.2, and DP in
SS.3.7.4 which are the benchmark standards that were used in the SLOs.
Noriega, 62
Although Student B (NT) didn’t met proficiency by the end of the unit, I believe he made
growth from the pre-assessment to the summative assessment. Student B (NT) was able to
create quality work and showed he is a self-directed learner. I could help Student B (NT) by
helping him organize his writing and his thoughts more efficiently. One way to do that would
be to provide and model how sentence frames. In the photo essay, I provided sentence fames
in the google slides template, however I failed to model it. By modeling how to use the
sentence frames, Student B (NT) will use it more effectively and create more comprehensible
sentences. Student B (NT) has shown that he can comprehend material, he just needs more
support in presenting his knowledge in a clearer way.

Noriega, 63
Student B’s Assessment Data Table:

Student B’s benchmark grades for each lesson

Creatio
n
Stories
Reading RI.3.1 Ask and answer questions WB MP MP MP
Writing W.3.2 Write DP
Speaking SL2.2 Recount or describe key MP MP DP
SL.3.1 Engage effectively in a MP MP
own clearly.
writing.
General GLO #1 Self-Directed Learner MP ME
Learner GLO #4 Quality Producer DP MP MP
Outcome
Social SS.3.7.4 Geography: Examine the WB MP MP DP
Noriega, 64

Creatio
n
Stories
Noriega, 65
Figure 12: Work from pre-assessment. Student B (NT)’s pre-assessment demonstrates that he
Hawaiian culture.
text.
WB WB WB
Noriega, 66

Noriega, 67
Figure 13: Work from Lesson 1. Reading and Graphic Organizer: This student’s highlighting
(SS.3.7.4) Student B (NT) has shown adequate knowledge of Hawaiian creation stories due to
the ability to recall 3 key supporting details and a main idea. Student B (NT) understands that
the main idea of the creation story was that Haloa was buried in the ʻaina (land) and
Hoʻohokulaniʻs tears on the ground caused taro to grow.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2) Student B (NT) is capable of finding key details from a text because he
provided 3 in the graphic organizer. Not only did he provide key details, but the key details
were taken directly from the text which accounted for (RI.3.1).
Noriega, 68
(SL.3.1) & (GLO #4) During work time Student B (NT) was self-directed and worked with a
partner to complete this graphic organizer. I noticed he effectively communicated and
collaborated to produce quality work (GLO#4). He reread the reading with him partner and
collaborated to complete their graphic organizers (SL.3.1).

SS.3.7.4: Show RI.3.1: Ask and SL.2.2: Find key SL 3.1: Engage GLO #4: Quality
text.
MP MP MP MP MP
Noriega, 69

Noriega, 70
Figure 14: Graphic Organizers from Lesson 2: Mostly complete work of Student B (NT)’s 3 bubble
map graphic organizers show he was mostly on task during lesson 2’s station activities.
(SS.3.7.4) Student B (NT) shows he learned more about Hawaiian agriculture by writing down
his findings on the 3 bubble map graphic organizers. I know Student B (NT) met the benchmark
standard in this lesson because his notes are detailed and taken directly from the sources.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2) Student B (NT) was able to answer the questions that were given in the
station’s directions using information directly from the sources. This meets the standards
(RI.3.1) and (SL.2.2) where he finds key information straight from the texts. Student B (NT)
received a grade of MP in these standards because he wasn’t able to complete the third graphic
organizer.
(SL.3.1) & (GLO #1 & 4) As part of the station activity, he was given the option to work with his
table to complete the bubble maps. Student B (NT) showed he was self-directed by not getting
distracted by his peers which is why he received a grade of ME for (GLO #1). He turned in
quality work and worked efficiently with his peers which is why he received a grade of MP for
(GLO #4) and (SL.3.1).
Noriega, 71

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask and SL.2.2: Find SL 3.1: GLO #4: GLO #1:
refering directly
from the text.
MP MP MP MP MP ME
Noriega, 72

Noriega, 73
Noriega, 74
Knowledge Student is able Student is able Student is able to Student is not
from the to provide vast to recount complete almost all able to
lessons amount of some photo essay with recount
information information little amount of information
SS.3.7.4 from the lesson information from from the
RI.3.1 into the photo the lessons lessons into
essay the photo
essay
spelling throughout the throughout the handful of errors throughout
photo essay photo essay throughout the the photo
L.3.1 photo essay essat
L.3.2
Completion Student is able Student is able Student is almost Student is not

to use creativity to complete able to complete the able to
W.3.2 to complete photo essay photo essay with complete the
photo essay with pictures some pictures photo essay
with pictures and
and information information
from the
lessons
Photo Essay and Rubric from Lesson 3 (Summative Assessment): This student’s summative
assessment is a clear example of a developing student.
(SS.3.7.4) According to Student B (NT)’s work, he knows adequate knowledge of Hawaiian

agriculture. He was able to complete all 4 of the google slides with at least some valuable
information. Student B (NT) received DP for (SS.3.7.4) because he wasn’t able to provide
extensive knowledge on the Loʻi Kalo slide. He told me multiple uses for kalo, however he
didn’t mention which part of the kalo is used to make those materials. In addition, he failed to
add information about parts of a loʻi although he added a sentence about it.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2) Student B (NT) received a grade of MP for (RI.3.1) and (SL.2.2) because he
was able to identify and main idea and key details for the creation story slide. Although his
writing isn’t as comprehendible for an MP grade, he was able to still provide the information.
He could have recieved an ME grade if he added additional key details and incorporated
sentence started such as “One key detail is..” and “Another detail is…”
Noriega, 75
(W.3.2) & (L.3.1) & (L.3.2) Student B (NT) received DP grades for (W.3.2), (L.3.1), and (L.3.2)
because his writing as a whole is still developing. There are spelling, grammar, and punctuation
errors. Also, some of his sentences are not comprehensible. I as his teacher can understand
the point he is trying to make however if someone else were to read his writing, they would not
understand the context.
(GLO #1 & 4) Although majority of his summative assessment grades are DPs, Student B (NT)
overall

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask W.3.2: SL2.2: L.3.1: L.3.2: Correct GLO #4: GLO #1:
Show and answer Write Find key Correct usage of Quality Self-
accurate questions to informative details usage of standard Producer directed
knowledge demonstrate text from a standard English learner
of Hawaiian understanding text. English capitalization,
agriculture. of a text, grammar punctuation,
refering and spelling.
directly from
the text.
DP MP DP DP DP DP MP ME
Noriega, 76
Student C (AL)
I chose Student C (AL) because is one of the highest achieving MLLs in my field placement
classroom. His academic strengths are in math and science. His area for development is
English Language Arts. In class, he displays characteristics of a self-directed learner because he
consistently manages his time and works efficiently on his own, with a partner, or with a group.
He excels in all learning settings. Student C (AL) listens during instruction, has some difficulties
focusing after recess, but redirects his attention. He asks appropriate questions that benefit
the whole class and is kind to all students. Student C (AL) has an English Language Proficiency
Level of Expanding and has an ACCESS overall score level of 4.3 in 2018.
Student C (AL) utilized all academic language supports to develop his understanding of
Hawaiian agriculture. He read all required texts, listened and participated in class/group
discussions, listened to all available feedback from myself and his peers. His level of
understanding is evident in his ability to answer the supporting questions, meet the content
and language standards, and progress in the enduring understanding with assistance of peers
and myself. Based on Student C’s Assessment Data Table, Student C (AL) met with proficiency
in almost all the standards. He received MP in RI.3.1, MP in W.3.2, and MP in SS.3.7.4 which
are the benchmark standards that were used in the SLOs.
Overall, Student C (AL) was able to meet proficiency in most standards. After the pre-
assessment, Student C (AL) received WBs in all 3 benchmark standards used for the SLOs. I
noticed this grade and provided Student C (AL) with the supports and accommodations for all
the MLLs throughout the unit. By the end of the summative assessment, he received MPs in all
standards besides (L.3.1) and (L.3.2) according to Student C’s Assessment Data Table. He made
Noriega, 77
amazing growth that I expected because of the comprehensible information that I provided the
class. He received a grade of DP for (L.3.1) and (L.3.2) because Student C (AL) still struggles with
creating some comprehensible sentences. He could have benefitted from rereading his work
and checking to see if he could understand his writing. In addition, he had errors with spelling
and punctuation which is important in a social studies unit. I believe Student C (AL) took
advantage of the sentence frames and visuals I provided to him and in turn, supported his
sentence structure. Student C (AL) took the longest out of the whole class to complete the
summative assessment. This is common for Student C (AL), as he likes to take his time. Lastly, I
noticed Student C (AL) did not answer “Parts of a Loʻi.” I think he could benefit from learnng
more about this whch will allow him to better understand (SS.3.7.4).
Noriega, 78
Student C’s Assessment Data Table:

Student C’s benchmark grades for each lesson

Creatio
n
Stories
Reading RI.3.1 Ask and answer questions WB MP WB MP
Writing W.3.2 Write MP
Speaking SL2.2 Recount or describe key MP WB MP
SL.3.1 Engage effectively in a MP WB
own clearly.
writing.
General GLO #1 Self-Directed Learner WB ME
Learner GLO #4 Quality Producer ME WB MP
Outcome
Social SS.3.7.4 Geography: Examine the WB MP WB MP
Noriega, 79

Creatio
n
Stories
Noriega, 80
Figure 15: Work from pre-assessment. Student C (AL)’s pre-assessment demonstrates that he
Hawaiian culture.
text.
WB WB WB
Noriega, 81
Figure 16: Work from Lesson 1: Reading and Graphic Organizer. This student’s highlighting
(SS.3.7.4): According to Figure 16, Student C (AL) was able to show the appropriate knowledge
of Hawaiian agriculture in regard to the Hawaiian creation story on Haloa. Overall, the key
details and main idea all relate to the creation story. He made the connection between the
Hawaiian creation story and Hawaiian agriculture by stating that Haloa was the first kalo plant
and the Hawaiians strongly believe in this creation story.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2): Student C (AL) received a grade of MP because the key details he chose
directly supports the main idea of the creation story.
(SL.3.1) & (GLO #4): Student C (AL) received a grade of MP for SL.3.1 and ME for GLO #4
because he decided to work with a partner in completing this activity. I noticed him and his
partner worked well together to determine the main idea and chose key details. In addition, his
graphic organizer was neat and easy to read.

Noriega, 82
SS.3.7.4: Show RI.3.1: Ask and SL2.2: Find key SL 3.1: Engage GLO #4: Quality
text.
MP MP MP MP ME
Noriega, 83

Noriega, 84
Figure 17: Graphic Organizers from Lesson 2: Student C (AL) didn’t perform his best for this
activity. The graphic organizers show he didn’t complete any of the 3 bubble maps.
(SS.3.7.4): Student C (AL) received a WB for showing accurate knowledge of Hawaiian

agriculture. He failed to complete the 3 necessary bubble map graphic organizers. While
monitoring students throughout the stations activity, Student C (AL) showed disinterest in the
stations where they were asked to explore websites in order to find information, but in the
second picture, he was able to recount important information about the uses of kalo. I believe
this was due to the fact that I provided this information easily using a table chart and visuals.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2): Student C (AL) received WB for RI.3.1 and SL.2.2 because he wasn’t able to
provide me important key details from the stations or answer the questions according to the
directions in each station.
(SL.3.1) & (GLO #1 & 4): Due to Student C (AL) not completing all 3 bubble map graphic
organizers, he received a WB for SL.3.1, GLO #1 and #4. I witnessed Student C (AL) choosing not
to work with his peers or listen to feedback that I provided him. He proved that he wasn’t
being self-directed according to GLO #1 and because he didn’t complete his work, he wasn’t
showing signs of a quality producer according to GLO #4.

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask and SL.2.2: Find SL 3.1: GLO #4: GLO #1:
Noriega, 85

refering directly
from the text.
WB WB WB WB WB WB
Noriega, 86

Noriega, 87
Noriega, 88
Knowledge from Student is able Student is able Student is able Student is not
the lessons to provide vast to recount some to complete able to recount
amount of information almost all photo information
SS.3.7.4 information from the lesson essay with little from the
RI.3.1 into the photo amount of lessons into the
essay information photo essay
from the lessons

spelling throughout the throughout the handful of errors throughout the
photo essay photo essay throughout the photo essat
L.3.1 photo essay
L.3.2
Completion Student is able Student is able Student is Student is not

to use creativity to complete almost able to able to
W.3.2 to complete photo essay with complete the complete the
photo essay with pictures and photo essay with photo essay
pictures and information some pictures
information from the lessons
Photo Essay and Rubric from Lesson 3 (Summative Assessment): Student C (AL) was able to
meet proficiency in 2/3 criterion and receive DP in 1/3 criterion. This shows Student C (AL) is a
student who is meeting proficiency overall.
(SS.3.7.4): According to Student C’s (AL) summative assessment, he shows accurate knowledge
on Hawaiian agriculture which allowed him to earn a passing grade of MP. He was able to
recount some information from the lesson into the photo essay by filling out all appropriate
slides with information he gained from each of the lessons. I recount Student C (AL) always
referring directly to his graphic organizers from the past lessons in order to successfully
complete his photo essay. He didn’t receive a grade of ME because he only completed the
minimum requirements instead of going above and beyond on slide 2 where he could have
addressed all stations.
(RI.3.1) & (SL.2.2): Student C (AL) received a grade of MP for both of these standards because
he was able to write about information from the lessons using the graphic organizers. He took
information directly from the graphic organizers and even utilized his peer’s bubble maps
knowing his was incomplete.
Noriega, 89
(W.3.2) & (L.3.1) & (L.3.2): Student C (AL) received a grade of MP for SLO W.3.1 write an
informative text about Hawaiian agriculture because he was able to complete the photo essay
with pictures and accurate information from the lessons. He also received a grade of DP for
standards L.3.1 and L.3.2 because I noticed errors in his spelling and grammar even after double
checking his work.
(GLO #1 & 4): Student C (AL) worked very hard on his summative assessment and showed high
qualities of a self-directed learner which is why he received a grade of ME for GLO #1. He
received a grade of MP for GLO #4 because although his work was complete, Student C (AL)
could have fixed his grammar and spelling mistakes to make his work more presentable
according to GLO #4 quality producer.

SS.3.7.4: RI.3.1: Ask W.3.2: SL2.2: L.3.1: L.3.2: GLO #4: GLO
Show and answer Write Find Correct Correct Quality #1:
accurate questions to informativ key usage of usage of Produce Self-
knowledg demonstrate e text detail standar standard r directe
e of understandin s d English d
Hawaiian g of a text, from English capitalizatio learner
agricultur refering a gramma n,
e. directly from text. r punctuation,
the text. and spelling.
MP MP MP MP DP DP MP ME
Noriega, 90
References
Borich, G. (2015). Observational skills for effective teaching: Research-based practice (7th ed.).
Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Brantley, D. K. (2007). Instructional Assessment of English Language Learners in the K-8
Classroom (1st ed.). London, UK: Pearson Education, Inc.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011). InTASC model core teaching standards: A
resource for state dialogue. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2011/InTASC_Model_Core_Teaching_Standards_201
1.pdf
Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching: Evaluation instrument: 2-13 Edition.
Princeton, NJ. Danielson Group LL.C.
Fairbairn, S., & Jones-Vo, S. (2010). Differentiating instruction and assessment for English
language learners: A guide for K-12 teachers. Philadelphia: Caslon Publishing.
Hawaii Department of Education. (2007). Hawaii content and performance standards. Social
studies. Retrieved from
http://165.248.72.55/hcpsv3/search_results.jsp?contentarea=Social+Studies&gradecor
se=1&strand=&showbenchmark=benchmark&showspa=spa&showrubric=rubric&Go%2
1=Submit.
Herrell, A. L., & Jordan, M. (2012). 50 strategies for teaching English language learners.
Hoboken: Pearson.
Himmele, P., & Himmele, W. (2009). The language-rich classroom: A research-based
framework for English language learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Noriega, 91
Himmele, P., & Himmele, W. (2011). Total participation techniques: Making every student
an active learner. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd
ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Noriega AsmtC 050819

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Noriega AsmtC 050819

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Noriega AsmtC 050819

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Noriega, 1

Assessment C: Candidate Effect on Student Learning

Reflection on Professional Growth ........................................................................................................................ 5

Unit Plan Framework ............................................................................................................................................. 9

Standards and General Learner Outcome Overview ............................................................................................ 10

Assessment Plan Matrix ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Reflection on Assessments .................................................................................................................................. 13

Student Learning Outcomes................................................................................................................................. 16

Impact on Student Learning ................................................................................................................................. 31

Reflection on Student Learning and Documented Evidence ................................................................................. 48

Overview of the Assignment

highlighted students will be assessed and addressed throughout the assignment.

Table 1: MLL Data

Listening Speaking Reading Writing English

Reflection on Professional Growth

educator is one that is effective, empathetic, prepared, and knowledgeable. To be effective

collaborate, communicate, and effectively learn.

grade level while also modifying or accommodating to the diverse learners.

teach our MLLs.

to my students and establish predictable routines to ensure stability and a routine.

Himmele, 2009, p. 26).

and together implemented behavior contracts for a handful of my students. We even

conducted a grade level talk on bullying.

seek professional development, consistently reflect on my instruction, create and maintain

Unit Plan Framework

1. Theme and Overview

Standards and General Learner Outcome Overview

Content Standards Lesson Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Content Standards Lesson Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Assessment Plan Matrix

Agriculture in Describe how a Checklist Students will be

Often times, language assessments of MLLs is often left up to specialists in a separate

proper training or told what to do by the specialist.

interviews and first-language writing samples (Himmele & Himmele, 2009).

In my unit, I implemented a variety of assessments to assess student learning and guide

my instruction. I used a pre-assessment, multiple formative assessments, and a summative

assessment. The pre-assessment required students to retrieve prior knowledge of Hawaiian

students’ pre-assessment. I initially thought students would show background knowledge of

them the pre-assessment.

I used thumbs-up/down/sideways, think-pair-shares, and questioning throughout the

Student Learning Outcomes

previous learning, 0 students met expectations, 1 met proficiency, 3 were developing

was the concentration and stamina of taking the assessment.

what understanding they already had on agriculture and Hawaiian culture.

information from the texts and utilize their notes.

in meeting the SLOs.

Pre-Assessment SS.3.7.4: Show accurate knowledge of

Standard Baseline data Targeted Outcome Outcome

Pre-Assessment RI.3.1: Ask and answer questions about

Standard Baseline data Targeted Outcome Outcome

Pre-Assessment W.3.2: Write informative texts about

Standard Baseline data Targeted Outcome Outcome

W.3.2 Write 0 students meet 0 students meet 0 students meet with

supports teachers in creating modifications intended on seeing student growth. Summative

task, or a tactile task/experiment.

developing proficiency, 2 students meeting proficiency, and 0 students meeting excellence.

as a result of multiple opportunities to practice gathering information from a text and

unit; however, it was done in other content areas such as ELA.

and meet the benchmark (W.3.2).