Anda di halaman 1dari 4

Action Research:

All teachers strive to affect student learning. Each teacher candidate will conduct Action
Research to document candidates impact on student learning. The project provides an
opportunity to measure students cumulative growth and progress during the implementation
of a unit of study. The attached rubric represents the scoring guidelines and provides criteria
for specific elements. The assignment should include the following components:
Title of Action Research Project
Abstract: Provide a brief summary of your action research report. Topics may include
student sample, instructional focus, and data collection and analysis.
Introduction: Provide a description of students, school, district or important features
that ensure understanding. The purposed is included and clearly stated.
Learning Goals and Objectives: The teacher candidate will set significant,
challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals and objectives based on the state
English language arts or math standards. Describe the students who will be affected.
What are the goals for improvement?
Assessment Plan: design an assessment plan to monitor student progress toward the
learning objectives. Plan appropriate assessment measures for assessing student learning
before instruction (pre-assessments), during instruction (interim or formative assessment),
and after instruction (post or summative assessments). Instructional sequence should
include a variety of assessment methods and strategies suited for the developmental level
of the students and your learning objectives. Align learning objectives and assessment
methods and strategies. Construct a table that lists learning objectives, the assessments
used to assess student performance relative to each learning objective, and a rationale for
each assessment that explains why the assessment was selected or developed. Expand
table as needed. Include copies of assessments, student directions, and criteria for scoring.
Student Objective (do)
1.

ELA specific assessments


Pre-Assessment
Formative
Post-Assessment

Rationale of Assessments

(NCTE 4.10)

Design for Instruction/Teaching Unit Plans: Designs instruction for the specific learning
goal and objectives that address characteristics and needs of students, and the learning
context. Design the lessons for the unit based on the learning goal and objectives, students
characteristics and learning context. Pre-assessment data must be used to guide
development or modification of your unit. Include all lesson plans and resources used in
unit plan. After administering the pre-assessment, analyze student performance relative to
the objectives. Provide a narrative description of the results and how the results shaped
your instruction.
Use of Technology: Candidate integrates appropriate technology that makes a significant
contribution to teaching and learning.

Instructional Decision-Making: Use on-going analysis of student learning to makes


instructional decisions. Based upon the experiences gained from teaching the unit, describe
a daily instructional strategy/activity and its assessment. Explain how the assessment caused
modification to the next days plan. Include an example for each day of the unit.
Impact on Student Learning (Results): Use assessment data to profile student learning
and communicate information about student progress and achievement. Report the results
of your assessments, including pre/post assessments and formative assessments to
determine students progress related to the learning goal and objectives. Use charts,
graphs and narrative to identify the performance of the whole class and two individual
students.
Reflection and Self-Evaluation: Analyzes the relationship between candidates
instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice. Candidate will
evaluate performance as a teacher and link performance to student learning results.
Reflect on performance and identify future action that could improve teaching and
professional growth. Identify the learning activity where students were most successful
and the learning activity where students were least successful.
Organization and Presentation: Is your paper error free? Does your presentation flow
and include all requirements? Do you include technology for your presentation? Did you
include the lesson plans/unit? Did you include student work samples?

Revised Spring 2016

Action Research Rubric


Name: __Action Research Title:______________________

Introduction
Score:_

Learning Goals and


Objectives
Score:_

Assessment Plan
Score:_

Design for
Instruction/Teaching Unit
Plans
Score:_

Use of Technology
Score:_____
Instructional Decision
Making
Score:_

Points 3
Proficient
Vivid and detailed description of students,
school, district, and/or important features
that ensure contextual understanding.
Purpose is clearly stated.

Points 2
Satisfactory
Adequate description of students,
school, district, and/or important
features that ensure contextual
understanding. Purpose is addressed.

Points 0-1 Insufficient


Limited description of students,
school, district, and/or important
features necessary for contextual
understanding. Purpose is missing.

State standards are clearly stated with


reference numbers, objectives reinforce
learning outcomes (what the students will
be able to know, understand, and do), and
align with standards. Objectives reflect
multiple levels of learning and are
appropriate for the development of the
student(s).

State standards are stated but not with


reference numbers. Some objectives
support the learning outcomes what the
students will be able to know,
understand, and do) and align with
standards. Objectives reflect few levels
of learning and lack
significance/challenge. Some objectives
are appropriate for the development of
the students(s).

State standards are not clearly stated or


not stated at all; reference numbers are
not used. Objectives do not support the
learning outcomes and do not align
with standards. Objectives reflect only
one level of learning and are not
appropriate for the development of the
student(s).

The plan is designed with multiple


assessments carefully chosen to fit the
content and the student skill level in
their complexity. Rationale for
assessments is clearly thought out to
reflect mastery of the content students
will learn.

The plan includes some assessments with


a variety of modes that fit the content and
the student skill level in their complexity.
Rationale for assessments doesnt align
with the content that students will learn.

Few to no assessments represent a


variety of modes that fit the
content and the student skill level
in their complexity. Rationale for
assessments chosen is not
included.

Pre-assessment data are charted, analyzed,


and consistently used to design and deliver
instruction. Learning activities are chosen to
consistently reflect best practices in the
teaching ELA and are suited to the
instructional setting. Lessons are specific and
relevant; unit/lesson plans and all other
resources are included.

Pre-assessment data are charted, analyzed


and some evidence is provided that the
data influenced instructional design.
Some learning activities reflect best
practices in teaching ELA. Lessons are
somewhat logically sequenced; student
engagement is low. Unit/lesson plans are
included, but other resources are not
included.

Pre-assessment data have not been


charted and analyzed or there is no
evidence that the information has been
used in instructional design. Few
learning activities reflect best practices
in teaching ELA. Lessons are
disorganized. Student engagement is
low. Lesson plans and other resources
are not included, missing, or
incomplete.

Candidate integrates appropriate non-print


media and technology that makes a
significant contribution to teaching and
learning.

Candidate integrates non-print media and Candidate does not use appropriate
technology into the unit that makes a
technology or does not use technology.
contribution to teaching and learning.

Instructional strategies/activities were


chosen for each day of the unit, assessments
were included for all strategies/activities,
and candidate provides thoughtful insights
for the next action based on the assessment
data.

Instructional strategies/activities were


chosen for about half of the unit.
Assessment were included for about half
of the instructional strategies/activities
listed. Candidate provides some insights
for the next action based on the
assessment data.

Instructional strategies/activities were


chosen for less than half of the days of
the unit. Assessment were included for
less than half of the instructional
strategies/activities listed. Candidate
does not provide a plan based on the
assessment data.

Impact on Student Learning


(Results)
Score:_

Reflection and SelfEvaluation


Score:_

Organization &
Presentation (includes:
PowerPoint, resources, use
of grammar/mechanics,
student work samples)
Score:_

For Whole class and individual students:


provides an in-depth profile of student
learning supported by data. Summary is
meaningful and high-level conclusions are
drawn from the data. Extensive evidence is
provided on achievement and progress
toward learning goal and/or each objective.

For Whole class and individual


students: provides some parts of
the profile of student learning
supported by data. Summary
includes some meaningful and
appropriate conclusions drawn
from the data. Little evidence is
provided on achievement and
progress toward learning goal/
each objective.
Provides thorough reasons for why students Provides few reasons for why students
met or did not meet the learning goals and
met or did not meet the learning goals
objectives; identifies the most and the least and objectives; identifies few
successful activities and assessments and
activities and provides little rationale
explores plausible, and in-depth reasons for for why some activities or assessments
their success or failure; provides specific
were more successful than others;
and relevant ideas for redesigning and
provides few ideas for redesigning
instruction and assessment an explains in
instruction, and assessment or offers
detail way these changes would improve
an inadequate explanation of why
student learning; identifies more than two
these changes would improve student
areas for improvement and lists and
learning; identifies areas for
describes a comprehensive plan to improve improvement and describes general
these areas.
activities to improve these areas.

For whole class and individual


students: profile is unclear. Summary
is inaccurate or conclusions are
missing or not supported by data. No
evidence is provided on learner
achievement.

The paper reads well, is polished and


grammatically error free. The presentation
flowed well and included all requirements
(for example, lesson plans and student
work samples). Project reflects mastery in
professional thought and effort expected in
a culminating teaching assignment.

Surface errors disrupt the meaning


of the paper and make the paper
difficult to read. The presentation
was poor, and there were several
errors. Does not reflect the typical
professional thought and effort
expected in a culminating teacher
education assignment.

The paper reads adequately and


problems with mechanics and
grammar exist. Some presentation
requirements were met and/or
presentation was not polished.
Project has sections that should be
revised and improved before
serving as a culminating
assignment.

Little or no evidence or reasons


provided to explain student
performance; provides little or no
rationale for why some activities or
assessments were more successful than
others; provides inappropriate or no
ideas for redesigning instruction, and
assessment; does not clearly identify
areas for improvement or provides a
poor plan or no plan to improve in these
areas.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai