WTS 7 Entry

Page 1

Improving Instruction
Jed Schilling
Saint Marys University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry Documenting a Guided Learning Process for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 7
EDUW 693 Instructional Design and Assessment
Sara Heisler, Instructor
March 20, 2016

WTS 7 Entry

Page 2

Entry Introduction
This WTS 7 entry documents a seven-step professional learning process to improve instruction.
The WTS 8 entry focused on a guided process to learn how the seven steps apply to improving
instructional assessment. This process serves as a transition from guided to independent learning in
applying the seven-step process for continued professional growth. The aim of this WTS 7 entry is to use
new instructional methods, strategies, and techniques that help students learn efficiently and effectively.

LEARNING STEP 1: Expand perspectives based on educator and student standards.

The essential question for this guided learning process: How do I improve instruction to
achieve each students developmental capabilities through confident and independently
competent learning?
Three types of standards guide teacher improvement in this learning process:

Wisconsin Teacher Standards (WTS) guide instructional improvement.

Academic Performance Standards guide content learning in each subject.

Wisconsin Literacy Standards for All Subjects guide communication of learning.

Educator Standards: Wisconsin Standards for Teacher Development and Licensure

Source: Wisconsin DPI website at http://tepdl.dpi.wi.gov/resources/teacher-standards
Areas emphasized during EDUW 693 are preceded by a rather than a symbol.
Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 7: Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons.
The teacher organizes and plans systematic instruction based upon knowledge of subject
matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.
Knowledge
The teacher understands learning theory, subject matter, curriculum development, and
student development and knows how to use this knowledge in planning instruction to meet
curriculum goals.
The teacher knows how to take contextual considerations (instructional materials,
individual student interests, needs and aptitudes, and community resources) into account in
planning instruction that creates an effective bridge between curriculum goals and students'
experiences.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 3

The teacher knows when and how to adjust plans based on student responses and other
contingencies.
Dispositions
The teacher values both long-term and short-term planning.
The teacher believes that plans must always be open to adjustment and revision based
on student needs and changing circumstances.
The teacher values planning as a collegial activity.
Performances
As an individual and a member of a team, the teacher selects and creates learning
experiences that are appropriate for curriculum goals, relevant to learners, and based upon
principles of effective instruction (e. g. that activate students prior knowledge, anticipate
preconceptions, encourage exploration and problem-solving, and build new skills on those
previously acquired).
The teacher plans for learning opportunities that recognize and address variation in
learning styles, learning differences, and performance modes.
The teacher creates lessons and activities that operate at multiple levels to meet the
developmental and individual needs of diverse learners and help each progress.
The teacher creates short-range and long-term plans that are linked to student needs and
performance, and adapts the plans to ensure and capitalize on student progress and motivation.
The teacher responds to unanticipated sources of input, evaluates plans in relation to
short- and long-range goals, and systematically adjusts plans to meet student needs and enhance
learning.
Student Standards for Academic Performance
Academic Performance Standards Guiding Content Learning
See Artifact B for targeted academic standards guiding the targeted learning unit.
Literacy Standards Guiding Communication of Learning
See Artifact B for literacy standards guiding the targeted learning unit.
LEARNING STEP 2: Pre-assess. Assess current educator effectiveness and student outcomes
based on evidence compared to educator and academic performance standards. Reason
inductively from that evidence to define area(s) most in need of improvement.
See Artifact B for student performance pre-assessments.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 4

Pre-assessment Analysis Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research

The general essential question guiding this learning process: How do I improve
instruction to achieve each students developmental capabilities through competent and confident
learning? The inductive reasoning visual below shows a pre-assessment analysis, interpretation,
and the resulting inquiry question more specifically suited to my areas to improve.
Reasoning Inductively to a Valid Inquiry Question Based on Assessed Evidence
1. Analysis
Gathered Data for Analysis, Grouped by Type of Evidence:
Areas to improve transferred from each pre-assessment.
Instructional Area to Improve (first underlined WTS 7 descriptor):

The teacher knows how to take contextual considerations

(instructional materials, individual student interests, needs and
aptitudes, and community resources) into account in planning
instruction that creates an effective bridge between curriculum
goals and students' experiences.
Instructional Area to Improve (second underlined WTS 7 descriptor):

The teacher plans for learning opportunities that recognize and

address variation in learning styles, learning differences, and
performance modes.
Designing Coherent Instruction (Table 1 )
Area to Improve: Implement instructional groups
Designing Student Assessments (Table 2)
Area to improve: Clear formative assessment plans
Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques and Engaging Students in
Learning (Table 3).
Area to improve: More student participation
2. Interpretation: Group key idea words into one/two focus topics
Formative assessments involving every student
3. Draw a Conclusion:

Key Idea Representing

Each Area to Improve
Bridge curriculum to
students experiences

Address diverse learning and

performance needs

Group activities
Planned formative
assessments
Every student responds

The general question guiding professional growth for this process: How do I improve
instruction to achieve each students developmental capabilities through confident and
independently competent learning?
The specific inquiry question that emerged from my pre-assessments: How can I design a
lesson to address diverse learners and verify that all needs are met?

LEARNING STEP 3: Research professional sources to find practical answers.

To focus on learning to apply the 7-step learning process for instructional improvement,
this research section uses key words and phrases in outline format to summarize inquiry findings.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 5

Introduction
Teaching science, and in this case a unit on waves, can be very effective using a
combination of engaging activities and formative assessments involving every student. Using a
variety of teaching methods allows the instructor to bridge the curriculum to students
experiences, increase student engagement, and include formative assessments involving every
student. These sources offered insight on how to incorporate these strategies to create an
effective learning atmosphere.
Research Summary
Most significant insight gained from source #1: If students are able to use computers,
there are several online labs and demonstrations to explore the electromagnetic spectrum.
Content Summary of Source #1: NASA (2016) created a Cool Cosmos webpage offering
over 20 activities for students to learn about the electromagnetic spectrum.
Key answers gained from Source #1:
1. Exploratorium (1997) provided a simple demonstration to show how x-rays worked using
a screen and a paper cutout.
2. Amazing Space (2016) contained several short computer animations featuring the
properties of waves.
3. National Center for Atmospheric Research (2001) had a short lab for detecting ultraviolet
light waves in tonic water.
4. The Annenberg Foundation (2016) offered an online simulation that explored the
properties of visible light.
5. Linda Hermans-Killam (2013) designed a website which offered an infrared zoo for
viewing warm and cold-blooded animals.
Most significant insight gained from source #2: NASA has a PDF file available
containing several lessons about the electromagnetic spectrum.
Content Summary of Source #2: NASA (n.d.) published an electromagnetic spectrum
PDF that has more than 10 hands-on activities and matching printouts.
Key answers gained from Source #2:
1. The introduction is a detailed reading containing descriptions of and uses for the EM
spectrum.
2. NASA provides teaching strategies on the PDF.
3. Each activity tells how to create a tool (such as a simple spectroscope) and has a
corresponding worksheet to use.
4. Each activity contains a short background reading and assessment suggestions.
5. The activities vary in difficulty and are ordered correspondingly for differentiation.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 6

Most significant insight gained from source #3: SchoolTube is a source for teacher videos
including science.
Content Summary of Source #3: SchoolTube (2016) featured the electromagnetic
spectrum in several videos.
Key answers gained from Source #3:
1. The NASA video clip shows a complete visual summary of the EM spectrum.
2. Once a clip is finished (if it a NASA video), a new one is suggested. This makes it
convenient to explore each part of the spectrum.
3. Innovation Workshop has educators explaining the EM spectrum. There are also students
doing hands-on activities that can be easily tried in the classroom.
4. Some links on SchoolTube are podcasts of teachers teaching lessons.
5. Each video contains a link with relates videos and a link to share the video which makes
it easy to add a clip to Google Classroom.
Most significant insight gained from source #4: Cosmic Colors is a teachers guide
including several lessons and student activities.
Content Summary of Source #4: NASA (2016) created a website containing more than 10
student activities with links and additional resources called Cosmic Colors.
Key answers gained from Source #4:
1. The introduction would be a perfect printout to provide students containing a brief
explanation of each part of the EM spectrum.
2. Each activity contains a recommended target grade level.
3. Each activity lists every subject covered.
4. Most of the activities are from NASA, which would complement the NASA video clips
on SchoolTube.
5. Each lesson contains a link to a PDF, which is available to download or print.
Most significant insight gained from source #5: TeachEngineering.org offered a series of
lessons with an engineering connection.
Content Summary of Source #5: Teach Engineering (2007) provided everything needed
in a short unit on the EM spectrum, including an introduction, associated activities, and
engineering connections.
Key answers gained from Source #5:
1. The site begins with a link to the NGSS and technology connections.
2. Learning objectives and a teacher introduction/motivation section are listed for
organizational help.
3. Key definitions are listed.
4. Attachments are available for handouts or projection.
5. Lesson extensions are provided.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 7

Conclusion
Finding new teaching strategies is a way to reach a more diverse population of students.
Research has shown several new and interesting lessons available to use during a middle school
wave unit. Computer simulations, video clips, short labs, puzzles, and scientific readings are
some of differentiated methods that can be incorporated into this unit. Within those strategies, a
teacher can be formatively assessing the students throughout each activity to verify
comprehension. Together these findings increase student engagement and help the teacher
identify progress.
Research Implications for Implementation in Planning and Instruction
The essential question guiding professional growth for this process: How do I improve
instruction to achieve each students developmental capabilities through confident and
independently competent learning?
My specific inquiry question: How can I design a lesson to address diverse learners,
which can formatively assess to verify that all needs are met?
Answers/insights from research and course learning that I intend to apply in planning and
instruction for my targeted learning unit:
1. SchoolTube links in presentation for student engagement
2. Computer activity with zoo animals and infrared images
3. Extensions using the NASA websites
4. Simple labs to bridge curriculum to students experiences
5. Different methods of teaching for diverse learners
LEARNING STEP 4: Incorporate learning into a plan.
See Artifact A for evidence of incorporating learning into lesson planning.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 8

LEARNING STEP 5: Implement plan and gather educator and student evidence.
See Artifact A. Evidence gathered during implementation included whole-class and a
lowest, median, and highest formative task sample.
LEARNING STEP 6: Assess teacher/student evidence compared to pre-assessment results.
See Artifact A for post assessment information related to teacher evidence. See Artifact
B for post assessment information related to student evidence.
LEARNING STEP 7: Reflection of entire learning process from two perspectives
Essential Question Guiding this learning process: How do I improve instruction to
achieve each students developmental capabilities through confident and independently
competent learning?
Teacher-as-Learner Perspective
Most significant insight, attitude, or practice that worked best for more efficient and
effective learning in comparison to my previous seven-step learning process: I have become
more conscience of including formative assessment in each lesson. If I can use the six Cs during
the lesson and formative assessment, I can understand how close the students are to achieving the
learning targets while providing them with the best possible atmosphere for learning.
Teacher-as-Learner Perspective
My next logical learning step(s) to achieve more efficient and effective learning as an
educator: I must continue to strive for the best practices of formative assessment. For example,
by letting the students cross out or correct in another color without penalties, they will have a
more direct comparison to the wrong answer.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 9

Teacher Perspective
Most significant insight, attitude, or practice that worked best to improve student outcomes
in this learning unit in comparison to previous outcomes: Student engagement, or having a captive
audience, increases learning in my classroom. I included more varieties of activities throughout
the wave unit this year compared to last year. In addition to improved formative assessment, the
different types of learning styles I catered to in this unit (acting, poetry, persuasion, and creating)
and my awareness of the six Cs, led to higher test scores than past years.
Teacher Perspective
My next logical learning step(s) for improving teaching practices to benefit student learning:
I will find new ways to make connections, captivate my students to make them more considerate and
cooperative, as well as continue to improve the quality and quantity of formative assessments.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 10

Research References
Annenberg Foundation. (2016). The science of light. Retrieved from http://www.learner.org
/teacherslab/science/light/
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. (2nd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Dover, L. Webb, L. Koratkar, A. (n.d.). Star light star bright. Retrieved from
http://amazingspace.org/resources/explorations/light/
Fetter, N. (1997). X-ray spectra. Retrieved from http://www.exploratorium.edu /spectra_from
_space/xray_activity.html
Heisler, S. (2013). Write teaching. Retrieved with password and username write1 from
MY SMU to Blackboard site at http://www.smumn.edu
Hermans-Killam, L. (2013). Infrared zoo gallery. Retrieved from http://coolcosmos.ipac
.caltech.edu/image_galleries/ir_zoo/
IPAC Communications. (2013). Cool cosmos. Retrieved from http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech,edu
/cosmic_classroom/multiwavelength_astronomy/multiwavelength_astronomy/activities.html
McLaren, C. (2001). Detecting ultraviolet light using tonic water. Retrieved from
http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_5_2_23t.htm
Simmons, L. Burkholder, F. Watrous, A. Yowell, J. (2007). Visible light and the electromagnetic
spectrum. Retrieved from https://www.teachengineering.org/view_lesson.php?url
=collection/cub_/lessons/cub_soundandlight/cub_soundandlight_lesson7.xml
(Teacher) aadelfio. (2011, March 27). The electromagnetic spectrum. Retrieved from
http://www.schooltube.com/video/6ea0d020a582f8d6b1c1/The-ElectromagneticSpectrum

WTS 7 Entry

Page 11

Artifact A: Pre- and Post-Assessment of Teacher Evidence and Related Improvements

LS 2, 4: Danielsons Framework for Teaching (Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System)
Descriptors in each cell paraphrase Danielson Framework for Teaching assessment
descriptors from the 2007 version. Underlined comparison words in each descriptor show preassessment ratings. Italicized comparisons or added words show post assessment ratings.
Unchanged ratings or descriptors that are both underlined and italicized generally
represent improvements within the same developmental range as the pre-assessment.
Rating codes: U=Unsatisfactory, B=Basic, P=Proficient, D=Distinguished.
Table 1: Pre- and Post-assessment of Instructional Design for Optimal Learning Processes
Danielson A Framework for Teaching, Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Component 1e: Designing
Coherent Instruction (p. 55-59 and chart on page 60).
Element
Rating Assessment Based on Danielson Framework Criteria.
Learning
B
1. {No/few/some/all} learning activities are suitable to students or to the
activities
To
instructional outcomes. Learning activities are {not/somewhat/mostly/all} highly
P
suitable to diverse learners and support instructional outcomes.
2. {None/some/most/all} learning activities represent
{limited/moderate/significant/high-level} cognitive challenge.
3. {No/some/all}are differentiated for groups of students. Activities are
{not/somewhat/mostly/all} appropriately differentiated for individual learners.
Instructional B
1. {None/few/some/all} of the materials and resources are suitable to students,
materials
To
support the instructional outcomes, and engage students in meaningful learning.
and
P
2. There is {no/some/substantial/continual} evidence of appropriate use of
resources
technology and {no/little/some/appropriate} student participation in selecting or
adapting materials.
Instructional U
1. Instructional groups {do not/partially} support the instructional outcomes.
groups
to
2. {No/little/some/continual}variety in grouping students. Instructional groups
B
{are not/are} appropriately varied for students and different instructional outcomes.
3. {No/little/some/obvious}evidence of student choice in properly selecting
different patterns of instructional groups.
Lesson and
B
1. The lesson or unit has {no clearly defined/recognizable/workable/clearly
unit
to
defined} structure that organizes activities.
structure
B
2. The overall structure is {chaotic/not uniformly maintained/maintained/clearly
maintained} throughout learning unit.
3. {No/Uneven/Even/Highly} coherent progression of activities.
4. {Unrealistic/mostly unrealistic/somewhat realistic/reasonable} time allocations
for each activity.
5. {Does not allow/Some allowance for/Allows} different pathways according to
diverse student needs.
Evidence sources:
Lesson plans from February, 2016.
Area to improve:
Implement instructional groups.
Evidence sources:
Lesson plans from (February, 2016).
Most improved area: Students were given choices on research method and poster creation.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 12

Most Significant Evidence that Supports Ratings in Designing Optimal Learning Processes
1. Pre: Students do not understand what electromagnetic waves are used for. Post:
Students were given daily goals with mini lessons on the parts of the EM spectrum. They added
to their posters daily to show understanding.
2. Pre: Activities reflect desired outcomes based on standards. Post: Students chose how
they conducted research, and were given the opportunity to fill out as much as they felt necessary
on their posters to describe the EM waves.
3. Pre: Instructional groups and student choice are not used effectively. Post: Students
were grouped by wave type and were given options to promote their wave to other groups as
we acted out the waves.
Table 2: Pre- and Post-assessment of Assessment Design
Danielson A Framework for Teaching, Domain 1: Planning and Preparation (p. 63)
Component 1f: Designing Student Assessments (Read pages 59-63.)
Rating options: U=Unsatisfactory, B=Basic, P=Proficient, D=Distinguished
Element
Rating Current Evidence to Support Rating/Area to Improve
Congruence
B
1. {None/Some/Most/All} instructional outcomes are assessed through the
with
To
proposed assessment approach.
instructional
B
2. Assessment methodologies {have/have} not been adapted for groups and
outcomes
individuals as needed.
Criteria and
B
1. {No/unclear/somewhat clear/clear} criteria and standards.
standards
To
2. Students {contribute/do not contribute} to development of assessment criteria.
P
Design in
B
1. Lesson plans include {no/rudimentary/well-developed/aligned} formative
formative
To
assessments strategies for all instructional outcomes.
assessments
P
2. Lesson plans include {no/minimal/particular/aligned} approaches to
engaging students in assessment and correction of their work.
Use for
P
1. {No plans/Plans} to use assessment results in designing future instruction.
planning
To
2. {Does not use/Uses} assessment results to plan for whole class (basic) and/or
P
group (proficient) and/or individual instruction. {Distinguished is all 3 levels.}
Evidence:
Lesson Plans from (give date). February, 2016
To improve:
Clear formative assessment plans
Evidence:
Lesson plans from (February, 2016).
Most
Assessments were voluntary as students wanted to share their ideas.
improved:

Most Significant Evidence that Supports Ratings for Designing Appropriate Student
Assessments
1. Pre: Peer review of EMS poster. Post: Students were advocating for their assigned
wave so they were excited to show peers.
2. Pre: Daily exit questions. Post: We discussed daily questions and noted how they
related to each lesson.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 13

Table 3: Pre- and Post-assessment of Instructional Design for Engaged Learning

Danielson A Framework for Teaching, Domain 3: Instruction. Component 3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques and Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
(This table combines rows in the Danielson charts on pages 82 and 85).
Element
Rating Assessment Based on Danielson Framework Criteria.
Quality of
B
1. Teachers questions are {of poor/a mix of high and low/high/uniformly high}
questions
To
quality in cognitive challenge.
B
2. Students generally respond with {single correct responses/some thoughtful
responses/thoughtful responses/formulating many questions of their own}.
3. Questions are asked {in rapid succession/a mix of succession combined with
inadequate time to respond/a succession with some time to respond/a paced
succession with enough time to respond and learn objectives}.
Discussion
B
1. Teacher-student interaction is predominantly {recitation style/with some
techniques
to
attempt to engage student in genuine discussion/creating genuine
P
discussion/creating student responsibility for the success of the discussion}.
2. Teacher {mediates all questions and answers./mediates some questions and
answers./steps aside when appropriate./steps aside when appropriate and
students often initiate topics and make unsolicited contributions}.
Student
B
1. A few students dominate the discussion. OR Teacher {attempts with limited
participation to
success to engage /successfully engages} all students in the discussion. OR
P
Students themselves ensure that all voices are heard in the discussion as a whole
class or in groups.
Activities
and
assignments

B
To
B

Evidence sources:
Area to improve:
Evidence sources:
Most improved area:

1. Activities and assignments are {inappropriate/appropriate} to

{few/some/most/all} students age or background.
2. {No/Some/Almost all/All} student are {mentally/cognitively} engaged in the
activities and assignments in exploring content.
3. Students {do not/sometimes/generally} initiate or adapt activities and projects
to enhance their understanding.
Digital recording of instruction from January, 2016
More student participation
Digital recording of instruction from (February 26th, 2016), teacher
observations.
Students were very engaged varied activities including acting, research,
creating posters, and writing poetry.

Most Significant Evidence that Supports Ratings for Designing Engaged Learning
1. Pre: Almost every student wrote answers on white boards when asked. Post: Each
student created a poster (picture or poetry) promoting why their wavelength is the best.
2. Pre: The same students had answers to questions over and over. Post: Students wrote
and shared poems to explain their EM wave.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 14

Evidence of Improved Instructional Planning

LS 2: Typical Lesson Plan Prior to EDUW 693
Prior to EDUW 693, my planning practices and instructional materials could be described
in one sentence as mostly based on horizontal standards.
The first seven-step learning process focused on improving instructional assessment.
From that process, I learned to have clearer expectations by examining vertical standards. I also
learned to provide myself and the students many more formative assessments, no matter how
simple they might be, to monitor progress.
This second seven-step learning process focuses on improving instructional practices so
students learn content more efficiently and effectively.
LS 4: Improved Lesson Plan: Evidence of Aligning Essential Planning Elements
This plan demonstrates understanding of 693 expectations for lesson design processes
and elements, guided by expectations in WTS 7-8. Highlighting represents planning terminology
and practices aimed at aligning expectations, content, process, product, and assessment elements.
5 assessment tools/methods: five formative or summative methods
6 levels of Blooms Taxonomy (explain missing or eventual levels)
5 thinking patterns (place term next to synonym: Introduce/Define by group
5 instructional strategies/techniques: see 693 term sheet for ideas
1 use of technology incorporated into entire unit (green type)
1 example of making purposeful connections: widening perspectives to realities, interests,
students past/present/future, cultural/racial/ethnic awareness, gender sensitivity, etc.
LS 4a: Improved Planning Related to Assessment
Targeted Subject: 6th grade science
Length of Entire Learning Unit: 3 weeks
Students Chronological Age/Grade Level: 6th grade

Topic: Properties of waves

Quarter: 3
Lesson Plan Source: self

LS 4b: Summative Task/Assessment for Targeted Learning Unit:

See student examples of test results
LS 4c: Key content expectations for proficiency range for the units summative task:
Current developmental LMH proficiency range: Gr. 2 to Gr. 6
Targeted Proficiency Range for Learning Unit: Gr. 2 to Gr. 6
LOW Differentiation: Students were given option to use the poster they created during
the test.
HIGH Differentiation: none
LSS 4d: Key literacy skill expectations for proficiency range for summative task:
Current developmental LMH proficiency range: Gr. 2 to Gr. 5
Targeted Proficiency Range for Learning Unit: Gr. 2 to Gr. 5
LOW Differentiation: Option to have test read to them or take the test in another room
or to do a paper copy rather than an online test.
HIGH Differentiation: none

WTS 7 Entry

Page 15

LSS 4e: Essential Connections that Align Learning to Learners in Learning Plan:
Essential UNIT Question (student appeal to motivate/broaden learning beyond academics):
How can you show energy moving in the form of a wave?
Essential UNIT Answer/Understanding (lasting truth/principle/rule/insight to answer EQ):
Wave properties (amplitude, wavelength, and frequency) can describe how energy moves
in everyday objects. Example: If students move a slinky back and forth rapidly, they send high
frequency/high energy waves. If they move it slowly, they send low frequency/low energy
waves. (Students completed an EM spectrum uses poster, and then were challenged to promote a
wavelength to the class in the form of poetry.)
Essential Thinking Pattern to Connect EQ to EA:
Relate how energy moves by wave properties. If it has a low frequency and a long wavelength,
then it is a low energy wave; if it has a high frequency and a short wavelength, then it is a high energy
wave.
Essential Connection to Expand Perspectives Based on Diverse Realities: (real applications that
appeal to learner interests; cultures; past, present, future events; personal needs, etc.)
Show animations, acting like a wave, readings, and real-world examples (example- radio
station call numbers are frequencies/musical notes are defined by frequency)
Essential Connection to Build Integrity, Empathy, and/or Insight:
After creating an EM spectrum poster, students sang along to an EM song, wrote poetry
about a part of the EM spectrum, and acted out the entire EM spectrum in the gym. One
representative from each wave spoke about their part in a video we created as a class. Several
poems (which contained relatable real world examples) were featured in the video, which we
watched as a class. The four days were titled Acting, creating, persuading, and connections.
Essential Conditions for Appropriate and Equitable Learning and Evidence of Learning:
Privately invite students who had difficulty on a test to come in at lunch to express their
knowledge in an alternative way.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 16

LSS 4f: Evidence of Aligning Essential Assessment Elements in Learning Plan

Backward Design: Align ending elements, beginning elements, and bridge the gap.
Process: Pace challenging and contrasting activities to sustain diverse learner participation.
Purposeful design so 3Cs build 6Cs: (Teacher cares, corrects, confirms to build student
connections, competence, confidence, cooperation, consideration, captivation.)
What to learn?
[objective(s)/action
word + content/topic]
Starting day FO1: First
KEY FOs for content:
Manipulate (APPLY) a
slinky to demonstrate
properties of waves.
FO2: CREATE model
of the EM spectrum.

How to learn?
[process for student learning]
(define instruction , including differentiation)
Manipulate the slinky (tension,
amplitude, and frequency) in order to
observe the changes and DEFINE the
parts of a wave.

FO3: ANALYZE the

parts of the EM
spectrum.

Using the drawing they created, to answer

questions COMPARE light waves by
DIFFERENCE in wavelengths. Here is
where they relate the EM uses to personal
interests.
Watch and work with an interactive
presentation that explains the properties
of the EM spectrum. Research two uses
for each wave (one must be a new idea
that was previously unknown to student).
Write a poem to ARGUE the fact that
your assigned wave is the most useful.
Perform an experiment by recording the
temperature of different colored
thermometers under a heat lamp.

FO4: COMPREHEND
how visible light
waves show different
colors, and a practical
use for each of the
categories of the EM
spectrum.
FO5: ANALYZE
which colors reflect or
absorb the most
energy.
Key SLOs at END of
TARGETED UNIT
Take the unit test.
RECALL terms.

After acting out individual parts of the

EM spectrum, RELATE how energy
flows through each part, (NEW) and
given a written overview, draw a visual
representation of the EM spectrum.

Evidence of Learning?
[product + assessment]
(task + assessment method)
FT = Manipulate a slinky to make observations about
waves .
FT= Answer lab questions based on observations.
A= Students correct their own lab and change any
incorrect answers.
FT = Act out a part of the EM spectrum.
FT= Watch a video of all the groups together and
analyze.
A= Students share observations of the wave we acted out
with the class (why it was a good model, and why it was
not).
FT = Create a drawing of the EM spectrum and uses
FT=worksheet and rubric to EVALUATE
A=Poster is peer reviewed with feedback, then checked
by teacher.
FT = Interactive presentation
FT=Answer quiz questions during presentation.
PROVIDE EVIDENCE BY DATA (ANSWERS).
FT= Teacher read EM uses as students worked,
volunteers read their poems to class.

FT = Lab to measure temperature change of different

colors.
FT=Questions on lab.
A= Students correct their own lab and change any
incorrect answers.
Sum. Task: New unit test. Unit test the following week.
Re-teaching and test re-take made available.
Summative Assessment Method:
Teacher corrected.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 17

LSS 4g: Lesson Plan Excerpt for Week of February 22-26

Link to plan

EMS Model
Electromagnetic Spectrum Diagram Grading
Labels, Pictures, 2 Uses
Gamma rays
_____ _____ _____
x-rays
_____ _____ _____
ultraviolet rays
_____ _____ _____
visible light
_____ _____ _____
infrared rays
_____ _____ _____
microwaves
_____ _____ _____
radio waves
_____ _____ _____
Wave drawn
_____
Title
Neatness

_____
_____

Use the resources provided to make a model of the electromagnetic spectrum. Be sure that your
model has a title and includes a wave. Draw and label the bands for each level. Provide two uses
for each type of wave.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 18

Artifact B: Pre- and Post-Assessment of Student Performance Evidence

Targeted Subject: Science Topic: Light Waves
Task at end of week: Students will describe what an electromagnetic wave is, and
understand how visible light creates different colors.
LS 1: Vertical Academic Performance Standard(s) Guiding Content Learning
Source of academic standards in vertical format: The Next Generation Science
Standards,
retrieved from: http://www.nextgenscience.org
Set 1: Targeted vertical academic descriptors representing range of student abilities to
capabilities:
Energy
PRE-LOW, POST-LOW. 4-PS3-2 Make observations to provide evidence that energy can
be transferred from place to place by sound, light, heat, and electric currents. [Assessment
Boundary: Assessment does not include quantitative measurements of energy.]
Wave Properties
PRE-MEDIAN, POST-MEDIAN: 4-PS4-1 Develop a model of waves to describe patterns in
terms of amplitude and wavelength and that waves can cause objects to move. [Clarification
Statement: Examples of models could include diagrams, analogies, and physical models using
wire to illustrate wavelength and amplitude of waves.] [Assessment Boundary: Assessment does
not include interference effects, electromagnetic waves, non-periodic waves, or quantitative
models of amplitude and wavelength.]
PRE-MEDIAN, POST-MEDIAN: 4-PS4-2 Develop a model to describe that light reflecting
from objects and entering the eye allows objects to be seen. [Assessment Boundary:
Assessment does not include knowledge of specific colors reflected and seen, the cellular
mechanisms of vision, or how the retina works.]
Evidence: See comments on lowest, median, highest student samples.
Targeted proficiency range: Age/Grade 4-5
Expectations to Differentiate: none
Set 2: Targeted vertical academic descriptors representing range of student abilities to
capabilities:
Waves and Electromagnetic Radiation
PRE-MEDIAN, PRE-HIGH, POST-HIGH: MS-PS4-1 Use mathematical representations to
describe a simple model for waves that includes how the amplitude of a wave is related to
the energy in a wave. [Clarification Statement: Emphasis is on describing waves with both
qualitative and quantitative thinking.] [Assessment Boundary: Assessment does not include
electromagnetic waves and is limited to standard repeating waves.]
PRE-MEDIAN, PRE-HIGH, POST-HIGH: MS-PS4-2 Develop and use a model to describe
that waves are reflected, absorbed, or transmitted through various materials. [Clarification
Statement: Emphasis is on both light and mechanical waves. Examples of models could include

WTS 7 Entry

Page 19

drawings, simulations, and written descriptions.] [Assessment Boundary: Assessment is limited to

qualitative applications pertaining to light and mechanical waves.]
Evidence: See comments on lowest, median, highest student samples.
Targeted proficiency range: Age/Grade 4-6
Expectations to Differentiate: none
LS 1: Vertical Literacy Standard(s) Guiding Communication of Learning
Source of literacy standards in vertical format: Heisler, S(2013) Write teaching
Retrieved with password and username write1 from MY SMU to Blackboard site at
http://www.smumn.edu
Set 3: Vertical literacy descriptors for range of thinking/communication abilities to
capabilities:
Idea Quality:
PRE-LOW, POST-LOW Grade 2: Thinking patterns emerging in ideas.
PRE-MEDIAN, PRE-HIGH, POST-MEDIAN Grade 3: Uses basic thinking patterns to
develop ideas that relate to the topic and task.
POST-HIGH Grade 4: Uses basic thinking patterns with breadth and/or depth in support to
develop ideas that relate to the topic and task.
Grade 5: *Developing main ideas for a topic: Define terms and define relationship between
term and the electromagnetic spectrum. Explain in relationship with details in visual so others can
understand it.
Evidence: See comments on lowest, median, highest student samples.
Targeted proficiency range: Age/Grade 4-5
Expectations to Differentiate: none
Student Evidence
LS 2: Pre-assessment task information: The students were given a worksheet on the basic
properties of waves. They were given 15 minutes to complete as much of the worksheet as they
could using a reading as a guide. About 50 percent of the students completed the entire
worksheet. After 15 minutes, we went over the answers. I proceeded to walk around the room
and only had students who either put down the wrong answer or not answered the question at all
to guess the correct answer. The students were intimidated at first, but soon enjoyed the
opportunity to try to figure out the answer with help from both the class and myself.
LS 6: Post Assessment task information: Students were given a 12-question quiz on
Skyward. The test was the same test taken by last years students.
LS 2: Pre-assessment: Whole class Performance to SLOs for Targeted Unit
0% had no responses on worksheet about basic properties of waves.
50% completed the entire worksheet.
Most could answer 10 of 15 total questions.

WTS 7 Entry

Page 20

LS 6: Post Assessment: Whole-class Performance in Comparison to SLOs for Targeted

Unit
The class average was 85% or 10.16 out of 12. The score was up 1% from the prior year.
This is significant because this years class has been scoring 1%-5% below last year on average
up until now.
LS 2: Pre-assessment: Lowest Student Performance Sample
(Pages seven and eight). Few responses on the pre-learning worksheet. The answers
were written after students helped each other in trying to figure out correct answers. The
worksheet had been filled in during the discussion, and the incorrect answers were changed
(guesses on the last page). The student was willing to get help from cooperating students who
completed the work correctly the first time. The student did not attempt the written answers on
his own, and usually guessed wrong on the short answers.
LS 6: Post Assessment: Lowest Performance Sample (Poster)
Differentiated process, assessment: Five students had the test read to them by an aide.
Measurable progress: Test: Only one of the students with special needs scored below
60%. Poster (last two): EM uses were not complete with basic answers.
Remaining proficiency gaps: Lowest students will get additional teaching in their study
hall.
LS 2: Pre-assessment: Median Performance Sample
(Pages three to six). Median students typically answered 10 out of 15 questions. The rest
of the answers were written after students helped each other in trying to figure out correct
answers. These students had to change or add four to six answers during the discussion. Once
again, they could add answers or change incorrect answers as needed during the discussion, and
were complete.
LS 6: Post Assessment: Median Performance Sample (Poster)
No differentiation
Measurable progress: Test: Average score was 85%, which is above the usual average for
the class. Poster (second one) was complete and the EM uses were unique.
Remaining proficiency gaps: Students who scored below 80% will have an opportunity
for re-teaching and a re-take during lunch.
LS 2: Pre-assessment: Highest Performance Sample
(Pages one and two). Highest students typically answered the entire worksheet with about
90% accuracy. This student only had one incorrect answer that was fixed and was able to
confidently take part in the discussion.
LS 6: Post Assessment: Highest Performance Sample (Poster)
No differentiation
Measurable progress: Test: 60 students out of 175 earned 90% or better on the test. Poster
(first) was complete, EM uses were all unique, and they added additional information about
frequency, energy, and wavelength.
Remaining proficiency gaps: none