Written Lesson Plan Rubric 4 pts. Accomplished 3 pts. Proficient 2 pts. Emergent 1 pt. Insufficient Initial Material Introduction to lesson, content area taught, description of students taught InTASC: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; ISTE NETS-T: 1, 2, 4, 5 Includes a thorough introduction to and justification for the lesson, including descriptions of the students (their grade, the particular ELL class they are in, proficiency levels, and language backgrounds). Includes a thorough description of all but one of the required and additional items Includes a thorough description of all but two of the required and additional items Fails to include a thorough description of three or more items Professional Standards (Arizona content standards; InTASC teacher assessment standards; ISTE NETS technology standards) InTASC: 4, 7, 8 ISTE NETS-T: 5 Includes a thorough description of the standards included in the lesson. The descriptions identify appropriate content standards from the Arizona Department of Education, standards from InTASC and ISTE, and a clear explanation of how the standard is evidenced. Includes a description of the standards included in the lesson, but the descriptions provide a somewhat limited explanation of how the standard is evidenced. Includes a description of the standards included in the lesson, but the descriptions simply list the standards without providing an explanation of how the standard is evidenced. Fails to include a description of the standards included in the lesson. Language and Content Objectives InTASC: 4, 5, 8 Content objectives are clear and specific. Language objectives include aspects of ESL, Content objectives are clear and specific. Language objectives contain either Content objectives are clear but overly broad (i.e., they cannot be taught in a single lesson) Content and/or language objectives are unclear, overly broad, or are missing
and higher order skills. aspects of ESL or higher order skills. Language objectives do not contain aspects of ESL or higher order skills. completely. Vocabulary Words and/or Academic Concepts InTASC: 3, 8 Between 6 and 8 vocabulary words or academic concepts listed to introduce or Between 6 and 8 vocabulary words or academic concepts translated into a second language. Between 4 and 6 vocabulary words or academic concepts listed to introduce or pre-teach. Between 4 and 6 vocabulary words or academic concepts translated into a second language. Fewer than 4 vocabulary words or academic concepts listed to introduce or pre-teach. Fewer than 4 vocabulary words or academic concepts translated into a second language. Vocabulary words and academic concepts are missing. Supplemental Materials InTASC: 3, 8 ISTE NETS-T: 2 List of supplementary materials includes at least 5 items. Citations are provided all non-teacher designed materials. List of supplementary materials includes at least 4 items. Citations are provided all non-teacher designed materials. List of supplementary materials includes only 2 or 34 items. Citations are incomplete or unavailable. List of materials includes only 1 item (or is the list is missing). Citations are incomplete or unavailable. SIOP Components InTASC: 4, 5, 8 Contains all 8 SIOP components. Each component is clearly explained and evident in the different instructional activities described in the lesson. Contains at least 7 of the 8 SIOP components. Components are less clearly explained in the different instructional activities described in the lesson. Contains fewer than 7SIOP components. Components are not clearly explained and or only sporadically tied to the different instructional activities described in the lesson. The SIOP components are only listed, incomplete, unexplained, or are simply missing. Clarity and of the Writing Meets all the following: ∙Neatly organized ∙No spelling, Meets four of the following: ∙Neatly organized Meets three of the following: ∙Neatly organized Meets only one or two of the following (or fails to
Product InTASC: 4 typing or grammatical errors ∙all acronyms are spelled out ∙Correct citations are provided. ∙Typed in black ink. ∙No spelling, typing or grammatical errors ∙all acronyms are spelled out ∙Correct citations are provided. ∙Typed in black ink. ∙No spelling, typing or grammatical errors ∙all acronyms are spelled out ∙Correct citations are provided. ∙Typed in black ink. present lesson in a professional manner): ∙Neatly organized ∙No spelling, typing or grammatical errors ∙all acronyms are spelled out ∙Correct citations are provided. ∙Typed in black ink. Lesson Demonstration Rubric 4 pts. Accomplished 3 pts. Proficient 2 pts. Emergent 1 pt. Insufficient Language Skills & Abilities Listening, Speaking Reading, Writing InTASC: 2, 3, 4 The lesson incorporates activities for all 4 language skills. The lesson incorporates activities for 3 of the 4 language skills. The lesson incorporates activities for 2 of the 4 language skills. The lesson incorporates activities for only 1 of the language skills. Sheltered Strategies InTASC; 3, 8 ISTE NETS-T: 2 The lesson incorporates 12 or more sheltered strategies. The lesson incorporates at least 10 sheltered strategies. The lesson incorporates at least 8 sheltered strategies. The lesson incorporates fewer than 8 sheltered strategies. Clarity of Posted Lesson Objectives InTASC: 1, 2 Posted lesson objectives were specific and clear and the lesson taught all of them Posted lesson objectives were specific and clear, but the lesson did not teach all Posted lesson objectives were not specific, unclear, and the lesson taught only one or two Posted objectives were missing, unclear, the lesson did not teach them
appropriately. objectives appropriately. of the objectives appropriately. appropriately. Student Engagement InTASC: 3 Students were on-task and engaged for at least 90% of the lesson. Students were on-task and engaged for at least 80% of the lesson. Students were on-task and engaged for less than 80 percent. Students were off task and unengaged for a significant chunk of the lesson. Creativity or “Performed Goofiness” Level of Lesson InTASC: 3, 5, 8 Instruction included at least 3 of the following strategies: humor, exaggerated body language, exaggerated facial expressions, drama or a “performance” of some kind. Instruction included at least 2 of the following strategies: humor, exaggerated body language, exaggerated facial expressions, drama or a “performance” of some kind. Instruction included at least 1 of the following strategies: humor, exaggerated body language, exaggerated facial expressions, drama or a “performance” of some kind. Instruction included none of the following strategies: humor, exaggerated body language, exaggerated facial expressions, drama or a “performance” of some kind; was deadpan, lifeless. Formal or Informal Assessment Strategies InTASC: 6 Instruction includes at least 4 assessment strategies (formal and informal) (e.g., observation of student work, one-on-one or group check-ins, comprehension questions, comprehension activities, content review, exit cards, etc.) Instruction includes at least 3 assessment strategies (formal and informal) (e.g., observation of student work, one-on-one or group comprehension questions, comprehension activities, content review, exit cards, etc.) Instruction includes only 1 or 2 assessment strategies (formal and informal) (e.g., observation of student work, one-on-one or group comprehension questions, comprehension activities, content review, exit cards, etc.) Instruction includes no assessment strategies. Academic Rigor (and its comprehension through teacher use Lesson was academically challenging; but teacher Lesson was academically challenging; but teacher Lesson was somewhat academically challenging; Lesson was not academically challenging (too simplified) and
of sheltered strategies) InTASC: 3, 4, 5, 8 ISTE NETS-T: 2 sheltered the content appropriately to make it comprehensible. sheltered most of the content appropriately to make it comprehensible to ELLs. and teacher attempted to shelter the academic content to make it comprehensible to ELLs. teacher made little or no attempt to shelter it for comprehension. Course Grades Overall Grade Attendance & participation (15 pts.) Weekly reading logs (3 @ 3 pts. each) Homework tasks (4 @ 2 pts. each) Discussion boards (5 @ 1 pt. each) Language Profile (Paper and Poster) Community Map (10 pts.) Reflection on a Sheltered Lesson in an unknown language (3 pts.) Classroom observation/field notes (12 pts.) BENCHMARK ASSIGNMENT (26%, but must pass benchmark to pass the course) Sheltered lesson plan (10 pts.) Sheltered lesson demonstration (16 pts.) TOTAL 15 pts. 9 pts. 8 pts. 5 pts. 12 pts. 10 pts. 3 pts. 12 pts. 10 pts. 16 pts. 100 pts. Image source: Gary Larson farm1.static.flickr.com/5/10830160_44d34906dc.jpg Spring 2014 Course Schedule
Date Discussion Topics Required and Optional Reading Assignments (available on D2L) Assignments Due (and activities to get ready for) Week 1- Jan 18 ■Course overview and expectations Course Syllabus - - - - - Send an email to your instructors with any questions you have about assignments Goals paper due (submit through D2L) Week 2 – Face to Face Jan 25 ■LRC 517 Bingo ■What is Structured English Immersion? How is it similar or different to Sheltered English content instruction? ■Review (and update) of state ELL policy issues: SEI and sheltered English content instruction (PART ONE) Sheltered Immersion Lesson Demonstration Required Reading ■Adams & Jones, “Unmasking the myths of Structured English Immersion” ■Clark, “The case for Structured English Immersion” Optional Reading ■Combs, “Everything on its Head” ■Saunders, Foorman, Carlson, “Is a separate block of time for oral English language development in programs for English learners needed?” Informal presentations and discussions of readings Week 3 – Face to Face Feb 1 ■Review (and update) of state ELL policy issues: The new English Language Development (ELD) program and other post Flores developments (PART TWO) ►HB 2064 & the 4 hour ELD block ►Discrete Skills Inventory ►Home language survey changes Required Reading ■ Arizona Revised Statutes , Article 3.1, Title 15-751-756 (Proposition 203) ■Flores v. Arizona, Order “W” ■HB 2064 (browse) ■Home Language Survey ■ Arizona Department of Education 4-hour block research summary ■Krashen/Rolstad/MacSwan critique of ADE research Reading log #1 due (about topics for week 3 – By Saturday 2/1) Small whole group analysis and discussion of policy documents
►Federal policy nexus paper Optional Reading ■9th Circuit Appellate Decision in Flores v. Arizona ■ Discrete Skills Inventory (browse) ■Horne v. Flores (Supreme Court) ■Contested Home Language Survey ■OCR Letter re HLS ■OCR Letter re AZELLA Week 4 Feb 8 ■Review of first and second language acquisition and development: The major theories and their implications for practice Required Reading ■Goldenberg, “What the research does – and does not – say” ■Peregoy & Boyle, “Second language acquisition” ■ Aukerman, “A culpable CALP: Rethinking the conversational-academic language proficiency distinction in early literacy instruction” Reading log #2 due (about topics for week 4 – By Saturday 2/8) Small and whole group analysis and discussion Week 5 – Feb 15 ■The role of culture in the classroom Required Reading ■ González, et al, “Funds of knowledge for teaching in Latino households” ■Yosso, “Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth” Discussion boards – Post/react to someone else’s post at least twice. Prompts are already posted. Week 6 – Feb 22 ■Sociocultural contributions to the education of English language learners: Major theories & theorists ■The importance of group work in ELL learning and teaching (One of the following articles will be assigned to you) ■Gutierrez, “Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space” ■Hawkins, “Researching English language and literacy development in schools” ■Lave & Wenger, “Legitimate peripheral participation” Reading log #3 due (about topics for week 6 – By Saturday 2/22)
■Lee, “Gesture and private speech in second language acquisition” ■Moje, “Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and Discourse” ■Rymes & Pash, “Questioning identity: The case of one second language learner” ■Vygotsky, “The role of play in development” Week 7 –Mar 1 Face to Face ■The role of culture (continued): Interpreting student interactions and responses through cultural lenses Guess Speaker: Sheltered Lesson in an unknown language Vidoe Presentation Required Reading ■Reiss, “Culture & content instruction” Language Profile Paper and Presentation-Poster (8 minutes max) Small and whole group debriefing and identification of sheltered teaching strategies Week 8 – Mar 8 ►Frameworks for teaching sheltered content: A rose by any other name… ►Reviewing and using the SIOP Model to teach content Required Reading ■Echevarria & Graves, “Sheltered instruction in the content areas” Reflection on a Sheltered Lesson in an unknown language due Week 9 – Mar 15 U of A Spring Break (March 15-23, 2014) – No Class Week 10 – March 22 Debriefing on classroom observations ■Introduction to the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) ■SIOP components 1 & 2 ►Lesson Preparation ►Building Background Required Reading ■Powerpoint presentations on Components #1-2 (D2L) ■Echevarría, Vogt & Short, “Lesson preparation” ■Echevarría, Vogt & Short, “Building background” Field notes of SEI/ELD visit due Writing language objectives and creating meaningful anticipatory sets (“warm up” activities) for your content area
Week 11 – March 29 ■SIOP components 3 & 4 ►Comprehensible Input ►Strategies ■The importance of and need to be “goofy” in the SEI classroom Sheltered Immersion Lesson Demonstration Required Reading ■Powerpoint presentations on Components #3-4 (D2L) ■Featherstone, et al, “Why isn’t Miguel learning math? Status at work” Evaluation of lessons for components 1 and 2 (Submit for class participation) Task #1: Submit content and language objectives for a lesson you have taught or will teach (including materials and vocabulary words/concepts you used) Practicing wait time, body language, gestures and facial expressions, using graphic organizers Week 12 5 Face to Face ■SIOP components 5 & 6 ►Student Interaction ►Practice & Application Required Reading ■Powerpoint presentations on Components #5-6 (D2L) ■Featherstone, et al, “Preparing for group work by teaching norms and rules” Community Map Evaluation of lessons for components3 and 4 (In class participation) Task #2: Submit a graphic organizer you created for a lesson you have taught (or will teach) Organizing group interactions in the SEI classroom, using realia, technology and activities Week 13 12 ■SIOP components 7 & 8 ►Lesson Delivery ►Review & Assessment Required Reading ■Powerpoint presentations on Components #7-8 (D2L) ■Echevarría, Vogt & Short, “Lesson delivery” Evaluation of lessons for component5 and 6 (Submit for class participation) Task #3: Adapt a piece of text from your own content area for ELLs Supporting language and content objectives , reviewing and assessing what students have learned, adapting text Week 14 – April 19 ■ELLs and Assessment (creating authentic assessment activities) Required Reading ■Valdez Pierce, “Assessment” Evaluation of lessons for components 7 and 8 (Submit for class participation)