**Each number corresponds to the numbers of the questions on the assignment sheet.
1. It was on Tuesday mornings that I visited Ms. G’s sixth grade self-contained special education class. The students would have a double period of English on that day and it worked out that those two periods were my prep periods. It was Ms. Graff’s second year teaching and it was obvious because her enthusiasm and tenacity never wavered. This was a refreshing start.
The assessment devices stored in the classroom included work folders,
learning centers with standards-based rubrics, ongoing writing journals,
review worksheets, and test preparation manuals. Ms. Graff explained
that individualized instruction was imperative in order to ensure that
annual I.E.P goals would be met. Therefore, it was necessary to assess
these students in a multitude of different ways.
2. During my observations, the assessment that I witnessed was very structured. The students were involved in an ongoing process of creating work-folder pieces. The work-folder pieces would provide the teacher with the opportunity to assess her students’ critical thinking ability. For example, one particular work folder piece asked that her students write a narrative procedure on how they solved a particular word problem in mathematics. This required the students to “stretch” their brains and get into the critical thinking mindset.
Rarely did I see a pop-quiz administered. As special educators, we all know that learning disabled students need transition and preparation time to create the very best possible learning environment. Why would I, or any other special educator in my department want to fluster the students during a time when we want them to be the most relaxed?
After every lesson, Ms. Graff made it a point to provide closure.
She did so by having a mini discussion that included comprehension question.
This gave her a sense of which students had a handle on the material and
which students were in need of extended instruction.
3. Before many lessons, Ms. Graff created a KWL chart with
her students to assess what they already knew, what it was that they wanted
to know, and what they have/will learn. The students seemed to enjoy this
exercise because it provided the students with an opportunity to connect
to the lesson. On this particular day, Ms. Graff had the students
begin a response to literature. They had just finished reading “The
House on Mango Street,” and were now going to compare the characters in
that book to another that they had read previously. It was imperative
for Ms. Graff to review the components of a standards-setting response.
During the lesson, Ms. Graff employed higher-order thinking words from
Bloom’s Taxonomy to encourage the students to think “beyond the box.”
Many of the questions were open-ended, allowing the students to develop
their thinking, express themselves, and reflect. Responses were written
on the board and the students were given immediate praise for their efforts.
Ms. Graff made sure she included all of the students and it was obvious
where she modified her questioning techniques to meet the various needs
of each student in the room. During the closing minutes,
Ms. Graff briefly summarized the necessary components of the response.
It was obvious that the students’ focus were elsewhere. This is where
I would have randomly called on students to explain one of the steps to
writing the response. I would require that they gave a detailed answer
to ensure that they had a full understanding of what was expected of them.
4. The student whom I conducted the behavioral recording with
was a boy by the name of Paul who had been labeled emotionally disturbed
at a very young age. As of April, Paul had been suspended numerous
times. He was impulsive, defiant, dangerously swayed by his peers,
and had been brought up on sexual harassment charges a week prior to the
time we first met. It was clear that reasoning with Paul was a challenge
for everyone that worked closely with him, regardless of the positive attention
he received continuously. The behavior I chose to focus on was calling
out during a class period. During my observations, it seemed that
Paul would consistently disrupt the lesson while the teacher was providing
instruction. It was a tremendous distraction to his peers as well
as to Ms. Graff. Being that I met with this class every Tuesday for
sixty-minute blocks, it was easier to focus on one behavior, as it seemed
I was already getting comfortable in that environment. During two
ten minute intervals over the course of sixty minutes, Paul called out
exactly two times per interval. At this rate, I can conclude that
Paul will call out 12 times during a one hour time period. Obviously,
this is a distraction and undoubtedly disrupts Ms. Graff’s ability to cover
the necessary material.
5. Towards the end of our meetings, Ms. Graff voluntarily showed
me her grade book. Each subject was divided into five sections.
The five sections were: tests/quizzes, work-folders, class participation,
homework, and behavior. Tests and quizzes were given numerical grades,
work-folders were given grades based on a 1 – 4 rubric, homework was checked
as having completed or not, and behavior was given a check plus, check,
or check minus. Behavior accounted for twenty percent of every subject.
6. The modifications that Ms. Graff employed were many.
For example, a new student whose native language was Creole, had someone
read the test to him. The tests were set up in an organized
fashion, providing all of the students with clear directions and transitions
from one part to the next. Some of the tests were verbal (for the
auditory learners), while others involved hands-on activities. The
material covered on the test was in the order that the material was presented
during the lessons to provide structure.
Closing remarks:
Ms. Graff created a safe, trusting, and stable environment for her
students to grow. Students were challenged, engaged, and took part
in meaningful activities and lessons on a daily basis. Her
positive rapport with the students was evident, rules and routines were
clearly established, and a clear behavior modification system was in place.
My hope is that all children with special needs are fortunate enough to
have an educator as knowledgeable, competent, and loving as Ms. Graff.
Thanks
Jessica!
Jara R-----
jara-----@aol.com
SPED 701: Observation Assignment
Dr. McIntyre
Date:
My fifteen hours of observation in Taryn B's and Emily K’s fifth grade inclusion class at P.S. 15* (1458 ** Avenue) provided me with a successful model of assessment in a class where 40% of the students have learning disabilities or emotional/behavioral problems. Ms. B and Ms. K create a nurturing, motivating, and stimulating learning environment where there is no distinction between the regular ed students and the special ed students. Their teaching techniques use assessment strategically and stress improvement without an emphasis on grades, the teachers have created a community in their class that accommodates each child’s individuality and prevents any sense of competition. The teachers treat assessment as a way of monitoring improvement without an emphasis on grades through assignments such as projects and writing pieces and during lessons. The unthreatening manner of assessment in this inclusion class is the most integral element to its success where most of the children are excited about learning and respect each other.
One of the first questions I had for the teachers when I reached the class before the students arrived was how they were able to meet the needs of both regular education students and students needing special education within one class. I was curious how the teachers could challenge the regular ed children while being sensitive to the needs of children with learning disabilities and emotional/behavioral problems. I asked them, “Do you make any accommodations for the children with needs and do you use the same criteria for judging both groups?” They told me that they don’t really test the children but focus on projects and assignments when grading and monitor improvement without grades. They pointed out a rug area with couches and comfortable chairs surrounding a dry-erase board as a replacement for the traditional blackboard, and the communal tables and individual cubbies as a replacement for separate desks. They explained that this communal setting is much more effective for learning and meets the needs of every student. They told me that as I observed through the day I would see that they don’t have different standards for the children yet they make adjustments to clarify and work with children who need more help. Not only do the teachers treat every child the same in terms of grading but the students respect one another and do not entertain a distinction between students’ abilities. With this understanding I was able to appreciate and learn from their teaching techniques which utilized frequent and continuous assessment to monitor each student’s understanding of the material.
Their teaching techniques incorporate continuous assessment during
periods of instruction and group or independent work to ensure that children
are grasping the material and feel comfortable for further exploration.
During my visit I witnessed many different types of assessment embedding
within instruction especially during carpet lessons and group/individual
exercises. Before a lesson the teacher asked questions aimed at the
group as a whole about what they remembered about the previous day’s lesson
in that subject area. For example, during a math lesson, Ms. K asked
“Do you all remembered what we did yesterday with estimating the product
of two two-digit numbers? Can anyone please tell me reasons we discussed
for using estimation?” She calls on Odette, who is raising her thumb
(a thumbs up means a hands up) and she answers.
During the lesson, Ms. Kessler called on students who were raising
their hands, the class as a whole, or singled out students who seemed to
not be focusing. Thus, she aimed assessment at all students.
As she showed new steps in how to play an estimation game she asked students,
using these ways of eliciting response, for instructions of what to do,
why to do it, and what they believed the answer to be. At the end,
students were given the choice of whether they wanted to play the game
by estimating the product of a three-digit number and a two-digit number
or two two-digit numbers. Then once they indicated which they wanted
to do, the teachers made small groups of 2-3 students to work together.
The game encouraged students to help each other to exercise what they had
just learned. While the students were in their groups the teachers
walked around to offer help and determine how well they were playing the
game.
To strengthen the delivery of comprehension questions, the teachers create a variety of semantic maps and charts with the children as a visual aid and means of assessment. Not only is this a useful assessment tool for teachers, but semantic mapping and simplification of ideas is helpful for children with learning disabilities especially. One example of this strategy was during a reading lesson when the teacher made a symbolism chart for The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe where the children could volunteer to fill in the chart with any thoughts they had concerning the book’s symbolism. As I looked around the room I saw similar charts discussing setting, characters, and plot progression, and other charts depicting the writing process, information regarding regions of the country, and fractions and decimals. This collaborative work lends an inviting feel to assessment of lesson comprehension and gives the children a sense of ownership in the room as their ideas are displayed on the various charts adorning the classroom wall. To delve deeper into the monitoring of the children’s understanding, the teachers rely on more traditional subject assessment through grades that stress effort and improvement.
In Ms. B's and Ms. K’s class, although there are occasional math tests and state mandated subject tests which the students are preparing for, most grading focuses on process and improvement through group work and independent projects. Some examples include homework, the word study cycle, state reports and publishing pieces. First, homework is not graded but checked on the basis of completion. Homework assignments usually involve working on a writing piece or practicing a math skill through reputation of a math game with a friend or family member. Second, the word study cycle is a spelling program that replaces the idea of spelling tests with a more interactive group project. Each unit spans four days where students are split up into groups to explore a set of words at different levels. The first day, children collect words and rewrite them. The second, students look at the word and say it, and then cover it up and try to write it. On the third day they play games such as fill in the missing vowels or hangman to practice their spelling skills. Then the last day students are paired up with another student and conduct spelling tests to each other. This individualized level of the spelling system requires a buddy check system which relies on peer review in correcting mistakes. No grades are given based on performance but children are graded to make sure they completed the assignment.
A third assessment tool used in the inclusion class is take home assignments in which the students can select a topic based on a given thematic unit. These projects motivate the children to explore a self-chosen subject and work on it at home where they can spend as much time as they need on it until it is due. An example of a take-home assignment would be the class’s state projects in which each student researched and wrote a book about a chosen state. Projects are displayed on a clothesline running across the ceiling of the room. These projects serve as a means of comparison to determine if students are improving from project to project.
Again, to stress the idea of improvement and mastery, a fourth form of assessment, publishing, mandates that the students follow a particular writing practice to produce a new piece about every two weeks. Through the process of brainstorming, revision, editing, peer review and publishing, the children keep a journal to document the progression of writing for them to reflect back on and for the teachers to compare writing skills as the year moves on. The children are given many stimuli for writing such as an event or topic, another piece of writing such as a story or a book, or an experience. They are given opportunities to write both at home and in school individually and in groups. The process relies heavily on peer-review and constant expansion and revision of ideas. When the children publish their pieces they create accompanying artwork and participate in a read-aloud publishing party. Despite all of these assessment activities, in my fifteen hours in the class I did not once hear mention of a grade. Children were motivated to learn for learning’s sake and took a lot of pride in their school work.
In de-emphasizing the role of grades and comparison, the function of report cards for this class is to indicate where the child is performing compared to grade-level standards. Grades on report cards, numbers 1-4, are simply indications of whether the student is above grade level, at grade level, below grade level, or should be held over. The teachers’ gradebook contains attendance records, some math quiz grades, homework grades (for completion) and grades for projects, but assessment goes beyond the gradebook to the teachers’ considering a child’s body of work as a whole.
I was very lucky to be able to observe in an inclusion class as successful as the fifth grade class at P.S. 15*. I was surprised that the students were motivated to master the subject matter without grades. I believe the children are excited to learn information since they feel ownership in the room and the teachers’ styles are sensitive to each child’s needs. The continuous assessment throughout lessons and comparisons made based on a progression of work are effective in determining where each student is in their learning and how they need to be best directed and encouraged to take the new information or skill to a new level of understanding.
Evaluation of Observation Setting
Your name__________
Jara R.___________________________________________________
Your e-mail address______________jarap@aol.com_______________________________________
Class for which you observed: SPED 701______
Professor for that SPED class _________Dr. McIntyre________
Semester during which you observed Fall
Spring Summer
Winter intersession 2003_
School/Setting at which you observed ___P.S.15*
1458 ** Avenue
(School & address)
_______________________________________________
Teacher whom you observed___Taryn B and Emily K ____________________
Grade/age/disability group observed____Fifth grade inclusion LD/EBD
Please rate the setting on the following criteria:
0 - No opportunity to observe this quality/Don’t know
1 - Never
2 - Rarely
3 - About ½ the time
4 - Usually
5 - Always
___5__ The classroom environment provided for student safety and emotional
well-being.
___5__ The classroom environment fostered inter-cultural understanding
and acceptance.
___5__ The influence of the students’ cultures on their behavior, interaction,
and learning was recognized
and addressed by the professionals in this setting.
____5_ The classroom environment encouraged independence, self-motivation,
self-direction, and self-advocacy.
__5___ Behavior management practices were positive and respectful in
nature.
___5__ Students were treated respectfully by adults.
___5__ Adults communicated with students on an appropriate language
level
___5__ Students were actively engaged in learning.
___5__ Instruction and activities were meaningful and challenging for
the students.
___5__ Instruction and activities were based on IEP goals and objectives.
____5_ The teacher modified instruction and materials to match the
individual learning needs of students.
___5__ Formal and informal assessment were used to determine achievement
and learning.
____5_ Assessment information was used to guide future instruction.
___5__ Professionals within this setting collaborated in a positive
and effective manner. There was a
sense of teamwork and collegiality.
____5_ The professionals in this setting evidenced a strong professional
knowledge base.
____5_ I witnessed excellent role models for professionalism and ethical
practice.
Thanks Jara.