Anda di halaman 1dari 17


Spring 2014
Leslie Vasquez-Hunt

1. How would you respond to a teacher who says, Well, if I follow the SIOP Model and make sure my English learners are able to access content using these activities, techniques, and approaches, my on-level kids and native English speakers will be bored. a. Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? What supports your position? b. How can teachers with only a few English learners in their classrooms organize instruction so that all students needs are met? A. No, I do not agree with this statement. I do not agree with the statement because SIOP is designed to engage all learners and at all levels. If a teacher properly uses SIOP, most students will be engaged 90% of the time. Every student in the class will benefit from a teaching using SIOP practices within all of their lessons. SIOP includes hands-on interaction, grouping configurations, oral interaction, and is visually stimulating. There is such a great opportunity for all the students to be able to key in on their learning style, that each student should enjoy learning, and be able to retain what they just learned. A SIOP classroom meets the needs of all students, with the main idea to reach the English Language Learner (ELL). However, I believe with a statement I heard recently, All students are Language Learners, not just the ones gaining a second language. As an instructor it is my responsibility to make sure I am meeting the needs of all my students, and with SIOP I am able to meet those needs. Using SIOP gives opportunities for other students to verbalize and internalize knowledge. By giving students the chance to work with other students and see different ways of thinking, and taking that knowledge and adding it to what they already know improves their success. It also makes learning easier, more enjoyable, and natural. SIOP in my mind connects to Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory. Which includes the teacher scaffolding the student, then the students interact the i+1, finally students are able to formulate their own thinking in their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) they will reach that Ahaa moment, and proof that learning is taking place. B. A teacher with only a few English learners in their classroom can organize instruction so that all students needs are met by using SIOP and by knowing their students needs. When a teacher is aware of their students needs they are more capable of organizing their instruction. For example, I have a few students in my classroom who do not work well with specific students in my classroom. I also know they are very bright students. They are able to mentally see math problems in their heads, they know what to do on an assignment before I have given all of the instructions, and they usually finish before the rest of the class. However, these few students also struggle when it comes to writing and creativity. The rest of my class enjoys writing and creativity. Which means, in order for me to organize my instruction, I want to make sure I am using multiple ways to engage all of the needs of all of my students. For math, I pull these few students off to the side, briefly explain what I am expected from the assignment, then give them instructions on what to do once they have completed the assignment, which usually includes enrichment activities according to the lesson. The rest of the class I follow the I do, we do, you do flow of teaching. I also include ways to be creative and explore new possibilities and answers. This usually includes manipulatives, drawings, and

models. By accommodating the needs of these students, including the English learners, each of the members of my class is getting what they need to learn and grow. I do not always break my class up like this, because I still like to include higher order questioning, and different types of grouping configurations, and building background knowledge. I also know that this will not work for every class because the students needs are all different. But, there are endless possibilities of making the appropriate accommodations for education. 2. A factual question a teacher might ask based on social studies text, Who was the first president of the United States? Given the topic of the presidency, what are several additional questions you could ask that promote higher-order thinking? List three (3). Why is it important to use a variety of questioning strategies with English learners? Why was George Washington elected the first president of the United States? What is a president? How does a person become a president? Why do we have a president, and not a king? It is important to use a variety of questioning strategies with English learners because it helps simulate and focus students thinking while helping the teacher understand their thinking. By doing this, the teacher can fill the gaps or misconceptions about what they are learning or what they have already learned. Additionally, asking higher-level questions improves students learning and understanding. If a teacher changes the way they ask questions from the yes/no responses, it gives students more of an opportunity to internalize the question, think about what they would like to say, and then verbalize the answer. By asking higher order thinking questions students are responsible for their thinking, and in turn will increase their intelligence. According to Blooms taxonomy if a teacher asks these higher order questions a student will be able to access knowledge or recall information in their mind. It will help build their comprehension and understand the meaning or translation of problems and content. Students will be able to apply this knowledge or concept to new concepts and feel confident about what they know. They will be able to analyze and synthesize information and apply these new skills in all areas of their life. 3. Compare and contrast the following two teachers approaches to teaching a lesson on nutrition. a. One teachers approach involves a lecture, a diagram of the USDAs Food Plate, and a list of appropriate foods for each group. Students are then tested about their knowledge of the percentage of each food type they should eat at a meal. b. The other teachers approach begins with students maintaining a food diary for a week. Copies of the Food Plate are distributed and explained, and all students must analyze their food consumption according to the national recommendations. With a partner, students must design nutritionally sound weekly menu for each day of the following week, and they must be prepared to defend their food choices to peer group members.

Which approach to teaching this content concept is most appropriate for English learners? How do you know? Be as specific as you can. To compare and contrast Teacher A and Teacher B I would start by stating that both teachers are teaching the same concept, which are nutrition and the USDA food plate. Teacher A is giving a lecture about the food plate, which includes a visual aide of the USDAs food plate. This teacher is most likely going to have her students store this information in the short-term memory part of their brain long enough for them to be tested. Teacher B has her students track their food for a week and analyze their food consumption according to the USDAs food plate. Teacher B explains the food plate to the students and gives them the opportunity to work with a partner to design a weekly menu according to the nutritional information they just learned for the following week. Teacher A gives the students the information, but she does not give them anything to connect it to in their own life. It is purposeful, yet it is not a meaningful activity. Teacher B also holds these students accountable for the menus they created, and they must come up with sound reasoning to defend why they decided to eat the foods they consumed. I believe Teacher Bs approach to teaching this concept is most appropriate for English learners. I know this because Teacher B used the SIOP model to design her lesson. She included several of the components necessary to teach Language learners. She used supplementary materials, adapted content; there were meaningful activities, which linked to the students background knowledge. This teacher included grouping configurations and opportunities for interaction, and hands-on materials were used. Without seeing the lesson taught, I know the students were engaged and their language and content objectives were met. 4. How does a teacher determine whether a majority of students, including English learners, are engaged throughout the period? What techniques could be used to sustain engagement throughout the period? What techniques could be used to sustain engagement throughout the period? What should the teacher do if he or she senses that students are off task? Why is sustained engagement to English learners academic process? A teacher can determine whether a majority of students, including English learners are engaged throughout the period by their active participation in the class. I know when my students are engaged because they are listening to the questions I ask, and are participating in the group discussions that are taking place. They have eye contact with the person who is speaking. They are not drawing, writing, playing with items or their hair, and they are not trying to have a conversation with the person sitting next to them. When students are actively engaged in the lesson they know what is going on and what is expected of them. There are several techniques that could be used to sustain engagement throughout the period, but again, I have to go back to the SIOP model. If a teacher uses the SIOP model, 90-100% of their students will be engaged. I my own personal opinion they will not need to seek out a way to compensate for their boredom because the teacher has them actively engaged in their learning and they dont even realize it. SIOP has grouping configurations that enables students to verbalize, get out of their

seats and be active. Another technique could be hands-on materials, which is included in the SIOP model. Children like to be able to use their hands, minds, and buddies. If a teacher explains the parts of a plant to her class, and stands up at the front of the class describing the plant, and nothing more, they will lose the students interest quickly. However, if a teacher brings in several plants and asks her students to feel it, smell it, take it apart and describe the parts and journal about it. They will most likely stay engaged, and remember what they learned. Another technique could be think-pair-share. But, again more grouping and buddy configurations. This goes back to getting students up out of their seats, and an opportunity to listen, speak, and understanding different ways of thinking. By offering different techniques to teaching, all students, including English language learners, high ability learners, low learners, on level learners, visual learners, kinesthetic learners, and so on will be able to flourish and grow in your classroom. 5. Think of a content concept you might be teaching. Describe three different grouping configurations that could be used for teaching and learning this concept. How would you organize the members of each group? How would you monitor student learning? What would you want students to do while working in their groups? How would the grouping configurations facilitate learning for ELLs? A concept that I might be teaching could be Mythology and Olympian Gods & Goddesses. The three different grouping configurations I would use for this unit concept would be: Whole Group Group Investigation Team-Games I would start my lesson by teaching whole group. I would do this in order to build background knowledge, introduce the concept and set the objectives for the unit. I would then show a short video on a few of the Gods and Goddesses, read part of the chapter to get students engaged and interested in what they are about dig into. I would then present the instructions for the group investigations. I would set my students up into six groups of five students. I would organize my groups by incorporating multiple intelligences, making sure I had a variety of different talents in each group. But, I would also take into consideration their learning levels; I would place level fours with level twos and level threes with level ones, if this were at all possible. Once they were in their groups I would assign each member a different God or Goddess to investigate. Once the investigation is done, each member of the group is to teach the other members of the group about the God or Goddess they were required to learn about. The other group members are to gain as much knowledge from each other as possible. This can include models, pictures, and written information, as long as the God or Goddess is represented properly. Upon completion these groups will present their information to the class collaboratively and teach the rest of the class what they have learned. The final group configuration will be Team-Games; we would call it the Olympian Games of course. The games

would consist of review and skills to recall as much information as possible to be able to write a final report to be turned in as their assessment of the unit. I would be able to monitor the students learning by walking around and spotchecking the individual progress. I can listen as each member shares the information they have gained from their investigations. I will also be able to see how much they contribute to the groups by the way they teach the other members of the group about the God or Goddess they were assigned, and the way they present that information to the rest of the class. Finally, I will be able to assess the entire unit by the end of the unit reports they write individually to be turned in for the final evaluation or grading process. I will of course supply a rubric so they know what I will be looking for in their writing. What I would like my students to do by working in their groups is think of create ways to present their God and Goddess to the other group members. They will be able to teach each other what they know, but each person will have a different way of teaching or reporting back to the group. The idea is to have all students, including English language learners, to learn creatively and provide as much information as possible. For those students who are English language learners they will be able to work side by side another student and see their ideas, and connect with different learning styles. They will have multiple exposures to the concept and will have several opportunities gain the information. ELLs and all the other students will be able to gain knowledge and connect to their learning by having hands-on experience and materials. This provides all learners with meaningful activities using a variety of techniques to fill the gaps.

Dear Mrs. Clark,

January 30, 2014

Thank you for the opportunity to come into your classroom and observe your lesson on the volcanoes. It was a pleasure to see such diversity within your classroom. As the SIOP coach for Washington County School district it is my responsibility to provide you with feedback and guidance on the requirements of SIOP. For this particular lesson I was looking at all the components within the SIOP model. I will be reviewing all of those components within this letter. For the preparation aspect of your lesson I observed a combination of strengths and weaknesses. Lets focus on the strengths first. You were very successful at supplying supplementary materials for your students, which included semantic maps, graphic organizers, maps, models, and a text PompeiiBuried Alive. Additionally, you were able to provide meaningful activities for all of your students diverse learning abilities. You grabbed their attention with the books falling off the table, and had a well thought out demonstration of a volcanic eruption for your visual learners. However, as you stated your content objective for this lesson it would have been a perfect time to state the language objective as well. This aspect of your lesson was unclear to me, and would have been beneficial to know what your goal was in this area. The second component, building background knowledge, had more strengths than weaknesses. As far as the strengths, you were able to explicitly link students learning to their background knowledge. You did this by providing them the opportunity to do a form of Brain Dump. By allowing them to use the semantic maps at the beginning of your lesson, and write down all of the information they had on volcanoes. I also felt you connected the lesson to key vocabulary very well. You provided visual representation of these words; there was discussion along with a visual model in which you pointed out each vocabulary word during your demonstration of the erupting volcano. On the other hand you fell slightly short in the area of linking students to their previous learning. What I mean by this is in the future it might be helpful to connect the students to previous lessons on minerals, and the field trip to the Natural History Museum, let them know why these previous experiences and lessons were important to this lesson. Looking at the third component, comprehensible input, I strongly feel this was your biggest success with this lesson. I scored you with the maximum points possible in all areas and think you did an excellent job. Your explanations were clearly stated, your speech was appropriate for all learning levels, and you used a variety of techniques to make content concepts clear. Your students knew exactly what to do, and what was expected of their learning. Now lets look at the strategies component of your lesson. Your scaffolding techniques supported student understanding and was organized very well. You included the graphic organizers, models, comprehension techniques followed by a gradual release into the sequencing charts. I would like to see more of a variety of questions to promote higher order thinking throughout the lesson. You did ask several questions, however, your students didnt really need to think analytically. Lets try to push their thinking a little further and generate more conversations to engage your higher-level students. Moving into the fifth component, interaction, I see your biggest strength came from the opportunities for students to clarify key concepts in their L1 by using a bilingual aide to assist those students. Even though not all of your English language learners may have needed her assistance, this aide was helpful in accommodating the needs of these students. You have

successfully set up your classroom and provided opportunities for interaction. However, the students did not engage with each other as much as they engaged with you. In the future I hope to see more student-to-student discussions and hands-on experiments take place. Instead of choosing a few students for the volcanic demonstration, you could possibly group students and have 3 or 4 different groups participating in the experiment at the same time. Then, you could walk around and assess their learning and listen as they verbalize with their peers. This moves right into the other component of practice application. You are almost there in all areas within this component. Again, you have set the stage for them to apply these skills, yet they are more teacher driven and less student-to-student engagement. The hands-on materials were there; just let them apply the skills on their own within a group or with a buddy. This will allow them the opportunity to use their content and language knowledge thus, reaching those language objectives that are so strongly needed for all students. Now lets look at your lesson delivery component. Your strongest area was student engagement. All of your students were actively involved in their learning and the content you were teaching. I did not see students off task or wondering what was going on within the lesson, great job. However, I would like to see you slow down on your pacing so you can fit everything you have planned within the lesson, and give your students enough time to answer questions, and to finish their assignments. Also, I know your content objective was stated. Yet, I did not clearly see why volcanoes erupt. If you were to split the lesson into a two-day lesson, you might have been able to fill the gaps, give more time, and focus more evenly between volcanoes and why they erupt. Furthermore, you will leave yourself with enough time to review all of your objectives and key vocabulary. This aspect of your lesson was not apparent and benefits all of your students. This would also provide you with the ability to assess your students learning in a timely manner. Instead of leaving the sequencing chart for the following day, it could be used the following day for a review and then an assessment could be given on why the volcanoes erupt and the sequencing chart. I know you are well on your way to becoming a wonderful SIOP teacher. I look forward to seeing your progress in the near future. Please contact me to set up a time for another observation and to go over any questions or concerns you might have. Again, thank you for the opportunity to be apart of your learning experience and your classroom.


Leslie Vasquez-Hunt

Total Points Possible: 120 (Subtract 4 points for each NA given: ___0____) Total Points Earned: __84__ Percentage Score: __70%____

Directions: Circle the number that best reflects what you observe in a sheltered lesson. You may give a score from 0-4 (or NA on selected items). Cite under comments specific examples of the behaviors observed.

Lesson Preparation_________________________
1. Content objectives clearly Defined, displayed and reviewed with students

Content objectives for students implied.

No clearly defined Content objectives for students

Comments: The content objective was displayed and clearly stated. However, the students were asked to read the objective silently as you read it aloud. I would like to see the students reading the objective with you out loud.

2. Language objectives clearly defined, displayed and reviewed with students

Language objectives for students implied

No clearly defined Language objective

Comments: There was not a specific language objective stated or written. It was unclear if there was a goal for this area that was clearly defined. Please remember to state your language objective as well as your content objective. 3. Content concepts appropriate for age and educational background level of students Content concepts inappropriate for age and educational background level of students Comments: The content concepts appear to be too simplistic for this class. My suggestion is to preassess the students to see what they already know prior to the 45-minute lesson or include this information in the pre-assessment for the unit. 4. Supplementary materials used to a high degree, making the lesson clear and meaningful (e.g., computer programs,

Content concepts somewhat appropriate for age and educational background level of students

Some use of Supplementary materials

No use of Supplementary materials

graphs, models, visuals) Comments: I really enjoyed all of the supplementary materials, great job. There were several materials used to connect to the lesson on volcanoes: semantic maps, demonstrations, graphic organizers, and model volcano eruption, Pompeii Buried Alive.

5. Adaptation of content (e.g., text, assignment) to all levels of students proficiency.

Some adaptation of content to all levels of student proficiency

No significant adaptation of content to all levels of student proficiency

Comments: The part of the lesson that stands out the most is when you used Pompeii Buried Alive for your text. The text was given to all students to read silently for two minutes. For those struggling readers and your language learners this might not have been enough time to read through the material. However, you did start reading the text to the class, and supplied a sequencing activity to help students connect to the process of volcanic eruption. 6. Meaningful activities Meaningful activities No meaningful that integrate lesson that integrate lesson activities that concepts (e.g., concepts but provides integrate lesson interviews, letter few language practice concepts with writing, simulations, opportunities for language practice models) with language reading, writing, practice opportunities listening, and/or for reading writing, speaking listening, and/or speaking Comments: There were several wonderful activities incorporated in this lesson that built upon multiple learning styles and opportunities for your language learners. The stack of book used as rocks, modeling of volcano erupting, predictions of student thinking about the text Pompeii Buried Alive, and semantic maps.

Building Background________________________
4 7. Concepts explicitly linked to students background experiences 3 2 Concepts loosely linked to students background experiences 1 0 Concepts not explicitly linked to students background experiences

Comments: I think you did a great job connecting volcanoes to students background knowledge. At the beginning of the lesson semantic maps were given to students to recall all the information they knew about volcanoes. There was even a question asked if there were any students who came from a country with a volcano.

4 8. Links explicitly made between past learning and new concepts

Comments: The class has been studying minerals, the concept didnt show a connection to the minerals, just why volcanoes erupt. I am not seeing the content connection for this particular lesson and there was no evidence showing a connection to the Natural History Museum. It is just unclear why this lesson is so important to the unit and the field trip. Why are the minerals important to the lesson on volcanoes?

2 Few links made between past learning and new concepts

0 No links made between past learning and new concepts

4 9. Key Vocabulary emphasized (e.g., introduced, written, repeated, and highlighted for students to see)

2 Key vocabulary introduced, but not emphasized

Key Vocabulary not introduced or emphasized

Comments: Great job! The key vocabulary words were written on the board, stated to the students, and used throughout the lesson by the teacher and students. The vocabulary words were used various times during the modeling of the volcanic eruption, and used during the reading of PompeiiBuried Alive.

Comprehensible Input_______________________
4 10. Speech appropriate for students proficiency level (e.g., slower rate, enunciation, and simple sentence structure for beginners) 3 2 Speech sometimes inappropriate for students proficiency level 1

0 Speech inappropriate for students proficiency level

Comments: Your explanations were done at the beginning of the lesson as to what the students will be learning for this lesson. During the demonstrations more explanations were given, and clearly stated so students could understand and connect. During the reading of the text PompeiiBuried Alive you slowed down answered and asked questions, the pacing was done well.

4 11. Clear explanation of academic tasks

2 Unclear explanation of academic tasks

0 No explanation of academic tasks

Comments: Your explanations were done at the beginning of the lesson as to what the students will be learning for this lesson. During the demonstrations more explanations were given, and clearly stated so students could understand and connect. It was evident that students understood the tasks they were

given, and the transitions from one activity to the next were clearly defined.

4 12. A variety of techniques used to make content concepts clear (e.g., modeling, visuals, hands-on activities, demonstrations, gestures, body language)

2 Some techniques used to make content concepts clear

0 No techniques used to make content concepts clear

Comments: There were a variety of techniques used to make content concepts clear. You used modeling of the rocks with books, the volcanic eruptions with household products, students labeled the volcano using vocabulary words, a graphic organizer was used at the beginning of the lesson. Students were able to make predictions about the text PompeiiBuried Alive and they were held responsible for their comprehension by using the sequencing chart.

4 13. Ample opportunities provided for students to use learning strategies 3 2 Inadequate opportunities provided for students to use Learning strategies 1

0 No opportunity provided for students to use Learning strategies

Comments: There was several learning strategies used in order for all the students to connect to the content. However, ALL the students were not participating in the activities, only a few of them were chosen to help during the second demonstration. Including the whole class in a group configuration would have given more students the opportunity to experience the volcanic eruption.

4 14. Scaffolding techniques consistently used, assisting and supporting student understanding (e.g., think-aloud)

2 Scaffolding techniques occasionally used

0 Scaffolding techniques not used

Comments: You used several scaffolding techniques to assist and support student understanding. This was evident within the brainstorming prior to the lesson on the graphic organizer, models, and comprehension techniques that were used before the text was read.

15. A variety of questions or tasks that promote higher-order thinking (e.g., literal, analytical, and interpretive questions)

Infrequent questions or tasks that promote higher-order thinking skills

No questions or tasks that promote higher-order thinking skills

Comments: The questions asked throughout the lesson were good questions. However, they were no higher-order thinking questions. Students did not have to think analytically to answer these questions; they just knew the response because of prior knowledge. Prepare to reach those students who need to pushed a little further with their thinking, and to keep them interested in the lesson.

4 16. Frequent opportunities for interaction and discussion between teacher/student and among students, which encourage elaborated responses about lesson concepts 3 2 Interaction mostly teacherdominated with some opportunities for students to talk about or question lesson concepts 1

0 Interaction teacherdominated with no opportunities for students to discuss lesson concepts

Comments: Have more opportunities for students to interact and discuss their thoughts with each other. There was a lot of teacher to student discussions. However, there were not a lot of studentto-student discussions. Students need to have the opportunity to internalize and verbalize their thinking with other students. This gives all of the students a chance to use their oral language skills.

4 17. Grouping configurations support language and content objectives of the lesson

2 Grouping configurations unevenly support the language and content objectives

Comments: Although the classroom is arranged in three circular groups, there was not evidence of group discussions or collaborations. The interaction that took place among the students was in a whole group setting. There should be more opportunities for think-pair-share or table talk to support the graphic organizers, and demonstrations. This will give your students the opportunity to use their oral language skills.

0 Grouping configurations do not support the language and content objectives

4 18. Sufficient wait time for student responses

2 Sufficient wait time for student responses occasionally

0 Sufficient wait time for student responses not

consistently provided



Comments: Increase your wait time 2-5 more seconds. This will allow your students time to respond and an opportunity to formulate their thoughts. Some students wanted to respond to your questions, by the time they were ready you were already moving on to the next question.

4 19. Ample opportunities for students to clarify key concepts in L1 as needed with aide, peer, or L1 text

2 Some opportunities for students to clarify key concepts in L1

0 No opportunity for students to clarify key concepts in L1

Comments: The bilingual teacher aide was able to assist the students who needed help in their L1 during the lesson. This was very evident within the lesson.

Practice Application _____________________

4 20. Hands-on materials and/or manipulatives provided for students to practice using new content knowledge 3 2 Few hands-on materials and/or manipulatives provided for students to practice using new content knowledge 1 0 No hands-on materials and/or manipulatives provided for students to practice using new content knowledge

Comments: There was an opportunity for a few students to use the hands-on materials brought in for the volcanic eruptions. However, it would have been more beneficial if all the students had the opportunity to use these materials, not just a few.

4 21. Activities provide for students to apply content and language knowledge in the classroom

2 Activities provided for students to apply either content or language knowledge in the classroom

0 No activities provided for students to apply content or language knowledge in the classroom

Comments: There were several opportunities for students to apply content knowledge. However, the opportunities for students to use their language knowledge were not as evident. There should be more student-to-student interaction, and lesson teacher to student interaction.

4 22. Activities integrate all language skills (i.e., reading ,writing, listening, and speaking)

2 Activities integrate some language skills

0 Activities do not integrate language skills

Comments: You incorporated reading, writing, listening into your lesson. But, students need more opportunities to speak. Additionally, students were able to read and write but they did not have enough time to finish.

Lesson Delivery
4 23. Content objectives clearly supported by lesson delivery 3

2 Content objectives supported somewhat by lesson delivery 1 0 Content objectives not supported by lesson delivery

Comments: You did a wonderful job on half of the content objective. Students fully understand what volcanoes are, but not WHY they erupt. This part of lesson was not clearly defined for the students. There was content vocabulary supported by models, demonstrations and text, however, there was no evidence of the reasoning behind the eruptions.

4 24. Language objectives clearly supported by lesson delivery

2 Language objective somewhat supported by lesson delivery

0 Language objectives not supported by lesson delivery

Comments: Reading, writing, and listening was evident within the lesson. However, the lesson lacked opportunities for students to use language to speak what they have learned. Additionally, the opportunity for students to show evidence of their comprehension from the text fell short due to the lack of time give for them to complete the sequencing chart.

4 25. Student engagement approximately 90% to 100% of the period


2 Students engaged approximately 70% of t period

0 Students engaged less than 50% of the period

Comments: Students remained on task during the entire lesson. 3 2 1 0

26. Pacing of

Pacing generally


the lesson appropriate to students ability levels

appropriate, but at times too fast or too slow

Comments: This lesson could be broken into two separate lessons. At times it seemed as though students did not have enough time to answer questions, read their text and answer the sequencing chart. Additionally, there would be more time to go into depth as to why volcanoes erupt.

inappropriate to the students ability levels

Review/Assessment ____________________
27. Comprehensive review of key vocabulary 4 3 2 Uneven review of key vocabulary 1 0 No review of key vocabulary

Comments: Vocabulary was introduced and used throughout the lesson. However, there was not much of an opportunity for all students to speak and use the vocabulary during the whole group discussions. There was no evidence of a review at the end of the lesson of these key vocabulary terms.

4 28. Comprehensive review of key content concepts

2 Uneven review of key content concepts

0 No review of key vocabulary

Comments: The concepts were reviewed throughout the lesson. However, there was not a comprehensive review done at the end of the lesson. Additionally, there was not enough time for the students to finish the sequencing chart in conjunction with their reading.

4 29. Regular feedback provided to students on their output (e.g., language, content, work)

2 Inconsistent feedback provided to students on their output

0 No feedback provided to students on their output

Comments: Some feedback was given to the students who had the opportunity to respond. There was not enough time for those students whose hands were raised to even answer the questions being asked. Again, I feel if this lesson was broken up into two lessons more time would be available for appropriate feedback on students output.

4 30. Assessment of student

2 Assessment of students

0 No assessment of students

comprehension and learning of all lesson objectives (e.g., spot checking, group response) throughout the lesson

comprehension and learning of some lesson objectives

comprehension and learning of lesson objectives

Comments: The assessment of student learning was unclear. If the assessment was the sequencing charts then there was not enough time for all students to be assessed appropriately. However, there were a few spot checks done throughout the lesson to check for student understanding. However, there was not enough evidence to support a formative assessment on the lesson.