Observation form 2017 value: 1.00 value: 2.00 value: 3.00 value: 4.00 Score/Level PLANNING-1 How well did the candidate prepare for the lesson? ● No lesson plan was evident, did not follow the lesson plan. ● Candidate was not prepared for the lesson. ● Could not continue the lesson due to technology or other preparation issues. ● Lesson plan, with handouts, submitted 24 hours in advance. ● Technology was working (had been tested before the lesson). ● Activities, reading, and/or projects had been completed by the candidate before the lesson to ensure they would work. ● Materials were out and ready to use. (Met Level 2 AND) ● Lesson was related to what came before and after or fit into the unit plan. ● Candidate was able to alter course if lesson not going as planned (had a “Plan B”). ● Lesson was connected to prior learning or personal/community/cultural assets. ● Lesson plan had teaching steps/questions/examples clearly written out (Could you teach this lesson from this plan?). (Met Level 3 AND) ● Lesson was tiered for various student needs. ● “Higher level” questions were written out ahead of time. ● Candidate collaborated with school resources/people to plan lessons to support learners with special needs. Standards USA- InTASC Core Teaching Standards (2015) Standard: Standard #7: Planning for Instruction The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context.
candidate open the lesson? reading, activity, or lesson without catching the learners’ attention. lesson with an introduction (hook) that introduced learners to the objective. ● The hook connected the lesson to prior knowledge (especially a review of previous learning), OR to learners’ cultural or familial backgrounds. ● Candidate elicited and built upon student responses to promote thinking and application. ● The lesson hook incorporated literature, music, art, realia, video or a related problem to solve. Standards USA- InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards (2015) Standard: Standard #7: Planning for Instruction The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. Performance: 7(c) The teacher develops appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and provides multiple ways to demonstrate knowledge and INSTRUCTION-3 What kind of questions did the candidate ask and how did they engage learners? ● Candidate did NOT ask questions to engage learners. ● Interaction was candidate to student only (lecture/teacher talk) ● Candidate asked closed ended questions (yes or no, right or wrong) only. ● Questioning is undirected (volunteers only). ● There was minimal (Met Level 2 AND) ● Candidate’s questions elicited students’ thinking or explanations over proscribed (right) answers. ● Learners were encouraged to provide examples/evidence in answers to questions. ● Posed questions were planned to allow participation of all learners in the class, including ELL, IEP students. ● Candidate followed up with checks for understanding. (Met Level 3 AND) ● Learners built on each other’s answers and asked questions that led the instruction. ● Prompts and questions required learners to elaborate and work with others to clarify and strengthen their responses.
● Candidate gave short directions and quickly moved through activities. ● Candidate did not use the classroom to his/her advantage (stood in front of the class, did not circulate, difficult to hear and understand). ● Did not use the equipment/materials effectively. ● Candidate used prepared questions, planned examples, note cards, power point and/or lists to keep lesson on track. ● Candidate gave clear directions and stated expectations. Restated or corrected directions if necessary. ● Candidate use of the classroom environment in a limited way to enhance learning (some moving around the room, could be heard, ● Candidate ensured directions are understood (repeated back, explained in student words, written on board, practiced). ● Directions included counter examples and exemplars. ● Candidate used the classroom environment to enhance learning (moved around, made sure he/she AND students could be heard, varied groupings/seating arrangements, incorporated movement, used of equipment and teaching tools efficiently). ● Candidate anticipated misconceptions and difficulties in directions/assignments. ● Candidate used the classroom environment to enhance learning for all students.
the candidate have that the instructional objectives were met? present. ● Assessment of learning objectives was not aligned to the lesson’s objectives. . aligned with the lesson, learning objectives and Standards addressed. ● Assessment was stated in terms of student performance. with the learners during the lesson (verbally). ● Candidate had clear evidence that learning objectives were met based on stated criteria. ● The candidate had some evidence of where to take the next day’s lesson based on the assessment. was provided during the lesson. ● Learners their progress based on what they have learned and what they still need to know. ● Learners had clear goals for improvement. Standards USA- InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards (2015) Standard: Standard #6: Assessment The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher’s and learner’s decision making. Essential Knowledge: 6(n) The teacher understands the positive impact of effective descriptive feedback for learners and knows a variety of strategies for communicating this feedback. Critical Disposition: 6(q) The teacher is committed to engaging learners actively in assessment processes and to developing each learner’s capacity to review and communicate their own progress and learning. Critical Disposition: 6(s) The teacher is committed to providing timely and effective descriptive feedback to learners on their progress. ASSESSMENT-2 What kind of formative feedback did the candidate give the learners during this lesson. ● No feedback was given during the lesson. ● General feedback indicated what learners did right OR wrong. ● Feedback was primarily limited to the whole class or a few (Met Level 2 AND) ● Specific feedback indicated what learners did right AND wrong. ● Feedback was individualized for some students and small groups, as well as provided to the whole class. (Met Level Three AND) ● Feedback focused on longer term learning goals. ● Feedback protocol was built into the lesson (peer editing, self-checking, finding/fixing errors, rubrics, listed criteria).