Administrators evaluate teacher performance as objectively as possible. Assumptions and bias are a natural part of the thought process. Administrators must be aware of bias, so they are ab
Administrators evaluate teacher performance as objectively as possible. Assumptions and bias are a natural part of the thought process. Administrators must be aware of bias, so they are able to provide valuable feedback to their teaching staff.
Part 1: Informal Observation Feedback
For this assignment respond to the case study in 250-500 words including the following:
Assumptions: At least 3-5 assumptions you have made about what is happening in the classroom.
Questions: Minimum of 3-5 open-ended questions you would ask the teacher about the class and lesson in order to test your assumptions and gain a better understanding of what you observed.
Positive Feedback: Positive feedback you would provide the teacher regarding their instructional style and presentation strategies.
Constructive Feedback: Constructive feedback you would provide the teacher regarding their instructional style and presentation strategies, keeping in mind the teacher’s experience.
Teacher: Mr. Smith
Teacher Experience: 20 Years
Grade: 10
Subject: On Level Biology
Upon entering the classroom, you observe students at individual desks, seated in rows, facing the front of the room. You do not observe any disruptive behavior during the observation. For the full 10 minutes you are in the room, Mr. Smith is presenting material about the parts of the cell using a PowerPoint. He is instructing from the front of the room (because that is where the computer is) and his presentation is concise, yet thorough and informative. There are multiple pictures, diagrams, etc. included in the presentation. During the presentation, a couple of students ask clarifying questions about the material. Most of the students are taking notes during the presentation.
Part 2: Reflection
Following your response to the case study, in 250-500 words, summarize and reflect on your initial assumptions and share a narrative from your professional practice in which an administrator made assumptions about your classroom situation during an informal observation or walk-through and how you addressed this situation. How does understanding your personal biases influence your ability to evaluate teachers? How will you make sure that your personal biases will not affect your future coaching process?
APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Case Study: Mr. Smith – Rubric
Assumptions 9 points
Criteria Description
Assumptions
5. Target 9 points
Response comprehensively includes assumptions made about what is happening in
the classroom.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Response adequately includes assumptions made about what is happening in the
classroom.
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Response vaguely includes assumptions made about what is happening in the
classroom.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Response ineffectively or does not include assumptions made about what is
happening in the classroom.
Questions 9 points
Criteria Description
Questions
5. Target 9 points
Response includes insightful open-ended questions to ask the teacher about the
class and lesson. Questions skillfully test assumptions and gain a better
understanding of what was observed.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Response includes suitable open-ended questions to ask the teacher about the
class and lesson. Questions accurately test assumptions and gain a better
understanding of what was observed.
Collapse All
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Response includes vague open-ended questions to ask the teacher about the class
and lesson. Questions minimally test assumptions and gain a better understanding
of what was observed.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Response includes inappropriate open-ended questions to ask the teacher about
the class and lesson, or questions fail to test assumptions and gain a better
understanding of what was observed.
Positive Feedback 9 points
Criteria Description
Positive Feedback
5. Target 9 points
Positive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is thorough.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Positive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is clear.
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Positive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is marginal.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Positive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is insufficient or inappropriate.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Constructive Feedback 9 points
Criteria Description
Constructive Feedback
5. Target 9 points
Constructive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is purposeful.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Constructive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is direct.
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Constructive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is shallow.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Constructive feedback that would be provided to the teacher regarding their
instructional style and presentation strategies is incomplete or implausible.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Re�ection 12 points
Criteria Description
Reflection
5. Target 12 points
Reflection extensively includes the following: initial assumptions, a personal
narrative, and how the narrative situation was addressed; how understanding
personal biases influence the ability to evaluate teachers; and how to make sure
personal biases will not affect the future coaching process.
4. Acceptable 10.44 points
Reflection credibly includes the following: initial assumptions, a personal narrative,
and how the narrative situation was addressed; how understanding personal biases
influence the ability to evaluate teachers; and how to make sure personal biases
will not affect the future coaching process.
3. Approaching 8.88 points
Reflection partially includes the following: initial assumptions, a personal narrative,
and how the narrative situation was addressed; how understanding personal biases
influence the ability to evaluate teachers; and how to make sure personal biases
will not affect the future coaching process.
2. Insufficient 8.28 points
Reflection inefficiently includes the following: initial assumptions, a personal
narrative, and how the narrative situation was addressed; how understanding
personal biases influence the ability to evaluate teachers; and how to make sure
personal biases will not affect the future coaching process.
Organization 6 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 6 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the
required word count.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is
within a reasonable range of the required word count.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with
a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the
required word count.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the
summary is widely outside of the required word count.
Mechanics of Writing 6 points
Criteria Description
includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use
5. Target 6 points
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-
developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are
varied and engaging.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder
comprehension. Variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some
practice and content-related language.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent
language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Total 60 points
,
Teacher: Mr. Roth
Teacher Experience: 4 Years
Grade: 11
Subject: U.S. History
You arrive at Mr. Roth’s classroom 3 minutes before the bell rings. You observe Mr. Roth in the doorway of the classroom greeting students by name as they come in. You hear him talking with students about non-curricular topics such as how the game went last night and asking about their weekend plans. Students spoke freely with Mr. Roth and seemed genuinely engaged in their short conversations with him. While waiting for the bell to ring you noticed posters on the wall regarding historical figures and events as well as a small area with student created political cartoons depicting the different freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights.
When the bell rang, most students were seated at their desks. Mr. Roth put up a bell ringer question of the day that asked students to summarize the power of the Judicial Branch in their own words and to react to the following statement: “The Judicial Branch is the most powerful branch of government.” Most students took out a blank sheet of paper and began to work. Two students were slow to get started. Mr. Roth moved over to each student individually and softly reminded them of the expectations. After being addressed by Mr. Roth, both students immediately got their materials out and began working. As the students were working, Mr. Roth took attendance, and met with a student that was absent the day before regarding make-up assignments. He then moved throughout the room and looked over students’ shoulders as they were responding. After approximately seven minutes, he asked the class for volunteers that wanted to share what they had written. Several students raised their hands and shared their responses. Mr. Roth commented briefly on each response and called on two students randomly as well to share what they had written. He then asked students to clear their desks and take out a pen.
Mr. Roth announced to the students that although they had already learned that the Judicial Branch interprets the Constitution, it is important to know where and how the Supreme Court actually acquired this power. He then distributed a summary and guiding questions on the case, Marbury vs. Madison (1789). Mr. Roth shared the day’s objective: Students will be able to explain the concept of Judicial Review and how the case of Marbury v. Madison established this power of the Supreme Court. Prior to reading, he asked students to skim the summary and look for key words, titles, etc. that would give them an indication of what the case was about. This activity lasted 3 minutes. He then asked them to share their predictions with their neighbor. As the students did this, Mr. Roth moved through the class and listened in on the conversations. Next, he chose a few vocabulary words from the summary that he thought many of the students would need clarified and were essential to fully understanding the reading. He briefly went over those with the class and checked for understanding by asking students to provide synonyms for the words, first individually and then sharing their words with the class.
Next, he broke the class into small groups of 3-4 students per group based on their proximity to each other. Students moved quickly into their groups with little loss of instructional time. When the groups were formed, he told the students they had 10 minutes to read the summary and answer the guiding questions. During the independent reading portion, he moved around the room to answer any questions about the reading and check to see how students were progressing through the questions. Two of the groups started to get off-task and chatty, but when redirected by Mr. Roth they returned to their work quickly. After all of the students had completed the reading and were working on the questions, Mr. Roth told the class they could now talk about the questions in their small groups. Students could either choose to write down the answers that were discussed in the group, or their own answers if they were not in agreement with their group's answers.
After the students had answered the questions collaboratively, Mr. Roth got the students attention at the front of the room, by stating, “let’s come together and discuss your answers.” He assigned each group one or two questions they would need to share with the class. As each group shared their answers, he asked if the entire group agreed with the answer and called on other groups randomly to share whether they agreed or disagreed and how the answer given differed from their group's answer. During this activity, Mr. Roth also reinforced key concepts.
To conclude the lesson, Mr. Roth asked students to go back to their bell ringer question and see if they still felt the same about their answer regarding whether the Judicial Branch, specifically the Supreme Court was the most powerful branch of government. As a ticket out the door, he asked each student to predict what our government or the U.S. as a whole might look like if Marbury v. Madison was decided the other way and if Judicial Review did not exist. Mr. Roth collected these responses as the students exited the classroom.
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
image1.jpeg
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
