Download
1 / 11
110 likes | 128 Views
Explore the implementation of instructional strategies such as choice menus, differentiated reading packets, and structured academic controversy during a professional development unit. Collaborate with colleagues and adapt practices based on strategy effectiveness. Enhance student engagement through differentiated supports and group accountability.
E N D
2014-15High ImpactSocial Studies Strategies Professional Development Unit
During the course of this PDU, what three instructional strategies did I implement? What strategy worked best? Why? (Please name 3 strategies that were introduced in any of the workshops) Based upon the PD that I participated in this year, I decided to use choice menus, differentiated reading packets with built-in glossaries for ELA students and Newsela articles, and a structured academic controversy. For sure, the best strategy was the differentiated packets. I sometimes used Newsela but often created and differentiated the work myself, building in glossaries for words that I thought students might struggle with. Students sometimes had choice about how to complete the assignment and I also used many of the examples that I saw in the SAC packet from our PD, so all of these strategies could be effectively combined. When I did the SAC on the atomic bombs, I tried to follow the structure exactly using someone else’s sources that I found online which ended up hurting the activity a bit. The structure is great; the next time I use it I’ll create the packets a little bit more carefully. Even then, the reflections written after the activity were very interesting. By offering students some choice and building lessons that allow them to work at their own pace with supports necessary to achieve the objective, I was able to see them engage challenging texts and support each other in their learning (rather than me telling them or giving the learning to them).
Who did I collaborate with during the PDU? Discuss the ways you collaborated while implementing the PDU strategies. (You can discuss the collaboration in any of the workshops as well) I collaborated with both of my Social Studies colleagues in U.S. History, Mr. Tomas Esquibel and Ms. Victoria Hodges. We meet in our professional learning community three days a week to write lessons, tests and quizzes, and to analyze and discuss data procured from our common assessments. We often shared lessons and strategies with each other such as the structured academic controversy and differentiated readings of challenging texts. The way that we wrote our student learning objective (SLO) for this year required that students use primary and secondary sources to make claims and support their answers with evidence, so we built lessons and assessments that required them to do this using strategies we learned from our professional developments. After writing a few of these lessons and exams using these strategies, we learned how to best leverage our efforts and time to focus on differentiated supports for our learners that has helped to increase their scores. Recently we have focused on combining these strategies and close readings of primary texts with more rigorous ACT-style questions which has challenged the students even more. Attached in this presentation you will find several examples of the work that we have done and I’m very proud of what we’ve accomplished.
What did I learn to do differently as a result of the PDU and strategy implementation in my classroom or in my practice? • There are three things that I do differently: • I approach each text thinking about how it should be differentiated for all of my learners and build in the supports. As we know, supports for ELA students are good for all students, so I don’t need to worry about too many. If students don’t need the supports, they won’t use them; if they do, they are available. I don’t “dumb-down” texts for anyone, but I will differentiate them by length. I also now build in glossaries for all readings whether they are in-class assignments, quizzes, or tests. • I offer students several different ways to achieve the objective (choice). I am not doing this every day, but I plan on continuing to build in more options for students as I continue to teach U.S. History. Specifically, I used the tic-tac-toe choice menu for a differentiated reading packet (attached). • I use group accountability in order to ensure engagement and participation. Many assignments before used a packet per pair or per group to save paper. Directions might tell students “read the paragraph together and answer the questions that follow.” Now my directions will include random collections of 1 group member’s notes or 1 member being called on randomly to answer. Students know that every member of the group has instructions and must be accountable. Students are graded as a group for effort and get to grade each other on effort. • OK, here’s a 4th one – I’ve also tried to create my own version of “History Mysteries.” Thanks Marianne!
Why is this PDU action research process important to my students learning and to my growth as a professional? (how are new strategies important for our students- and why is it important to grow your practice?) • Obviously students will benefit from better teaching that caters to their needs. The strategies that I’ve learned are not only more engaging, they are differentiated to increase students’ access to primary and secondary sources that they must understand in order to learn. This, in turn, has an effect on their growth on assessments and their confidence as learners. For myself, seeing my students more engaged and more confident increases my own confidence as an educator. I can trust my ability to create lessons that are right for my students and to trust them as independent, intelligent learners. I really do believe that approaching teaching in this way (in any subject matter) is beneficial for our students, teachers, and schools.
PDU Data AnalysisReflecting on the data you have collected, how did this experience impact instruction, progress monitoring, student performance, and your own practice? (please provide student data you have collected from implementing new strategies- quantitative and/or qualitative) • I’ve observed more student engagement and, on a qualitative level, more reflective and critical writing (mostly in exit tickets). • On a qualitative level, I have seen student growth on my SLO data. Our second SLO for the Social Studies department is broken down into 3 categories: SLO 2a is analyze primary and secondary sources, 2b is to make a claim, and 2c is to defend with evidence. We have observed growth in each category’s class average; specifically on a 1-4 scale I have recorded 1.35 points of average growth on SLO 2a, 1.18 on 2b, and 0.09 on 2c. SLO 2c also started at a higher level so I wasn’t expecting to see a lot of growth there. All three were in the proficient range for class averages on the last exam that they took: 3.88 for SLO 2a, 3.04 for 2b, and 3.04 for 2c. These results are fantastic!
PDU Artifact #1 • Attached is a differentiated packet of information on the Harlem Renaissance that I created after our PD and looking at both choice menus/tic-tac-toe and the structured academic controversy packet. Each page includes a glossary and discussion questions. Groups paired up and then chose which of the profiles they wanted to read and write a summary about, with one added element: they were competing against another pair with a single tic-tac-toe summary game sheet and were trying to get the win by filling in three in a row. This limited their choices a little bit but added some fun and a sense of urgency to their work. • *For full document, right click on the object and select ‘Document Object --> Open’
PDU Artifact #2 • Attached is the differentiated packet on the Cuban Missile Crisis. This is also based on the concept from “History Mysteries” that students must advise the President on what to do and solve the crisis without starting a nuclear war. The packet includes glossaries and different groups had less total sources to analyze (but didn’t know that as each packet cover was the same and all packets asked students to complete the same critical tasks). Also attached below is the reflective exit ticket. *For full documents, right click on the object and select ‘Document Object --> Open’
PDU Artifact #3 • Attached is my data tracker for my period 2 class with evidence on student learning objective (SLO) 2: analyze primary and secondary sources, make a claim, and defend it with evidence. Student names have been removed to protect anonymity and comply with FERPA. • *For full documents, right click on the object and select ‘Document Object --> Open’
PDU Artifact #4 I know it’s not necessary but attached is a 4th artifact; our unit exam on the Great Depression. As you can see, it’s just an extension of what they were asked to do in class and has built-in supports with glossaries and pictures for students who need this support. *For full documents, right click on the object and select ‘Document Object --> Open’
Exit Ticket • What support(s) do you need to further your professional growth in future PDUs? The greatest opportunity for me is to become more of an expert in my subject matter. Knowing what to teach and how to teach it takes up a lot of my time and energy, so I would definitely benefit from more resources and more time to examine these resources and write engaging, meaningful lessons based upon my learning. • 2 things that you took away from the PDU this year • Put the supports and differentiation into the building of the lesson in order to support all students (rather than trying to fit them in after the fact). • Use creativity, problem-solving, and simulations to write lessons that are both engaging and rigorous for our students; like SACs, History Mysteries, etc. • 1 next step for the peer observers in future trainings • Maybe you could bring a collection of the best artifacts/lessons that our colleagues shared and let us collaborate and extend those assignments to bring back to our own schools! That could be really fun and useful.
