Anda di halaman 1dari 6

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

Domain B Literature Review


Brendon Boitano
National University
December 14, 2016

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

Abstract
In this paper I will discuss the justification for my artifacts for domain B of the California
Teacher Performance Expectations. Domain B discusses assessing student learning. I will
discuss how the artifacts of exit tickets and an assessment for a Cold War unit I chose for
my PDQP relate to this domain.

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

Domain B of the California Teacher Performance Expectations (TPE) discusses


the topic of assessing student learning. This domain includes two TPEs, TPE 2 that
examines monitoring student learning during instruction, and TPE 3 that examines
interpretation and use of assessments. For TPE 2 I used a three different exit tickets I
have used with students in my classes as my artifact. For TPE 3 I used an assessment I
used at the end of a Cold War unit that asked students to create a board game.
Monitoring students learning during instruction is very important. A teacher must
use multiple measures for progress monitoring throughout instruction to determine
whether all students, including English learners and students with special needs, are
understanding content and making progress toward identified key concepts from stateadopted academic standards. (CTC, 2013) One way I check for understanding with my
students is the use of an exit ticket. Exit tickets are a deliberate way to establish an
expectation that students need to be focused and driven during the lesson so that they can
complete the exit ticket. Not only are exit tickets a great way to assess what students
learned, but they are also a good tool for teachers to see how well they taught the
material. If it is apparent that most students didn't understand the main points of the
lesson, then perhaps you need to go over the material again the next day. (Thompson,
n.d.) In my artifact I used three different types of exit tickets. The first one is a light bulb
that asks students to write down one thing that they learned form the lesson. The second
exit ticket asks students to create one quality test question from the lesson. Finally the last
exit ticket asks students to write down three things they learned, two questions they have,
and one thing they would like to know more about. I used these tickets to see what
students have learned and to check for understanding. I also act upon the information

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

gathered during instruction. (CTC, 2013) I dont just collect these tickets and toss them, I
use the information to help drive my instruction and make sure students are learning the
material. I can also check to make sure that all students, including English learners and
students with special needs, are learning the information. Furthermore I dont just use
these at the end of the class period, I will sometime use them after just a lecture to check
for understanding of what we just went over.
Interpretation and use of assessments requires teachers to understand and use a
variety of informal and formal, as well as formative and summative assessments, at
varying levels of cognitive demand to determine students progress and plan instruction.
(CTC, 2013) For this artifact I used a Cold War board game. This is an alternative
assessment. For a teacher to gauge students understanding of material they can design
alternative assessment, often called authentic, comprehensive, or performance
assessment. Examples of these measurements are open-ended questions, written
compositions, oral presentations, projects, experiments, and portfolios of student work.
Alternative assessments are designed so that the content of the assessment matches the
content of the instruction. (Edutopia, 2008) This is why I chose this type of assessment
for my Cold War unit. Students really thrived creating a board game as their assessment
rather then taking the normal test and the creativity they showed was amazing. It also
allowed me to see what the students really knew about the Cold War. I knew that this
assessment was effective, because effective assessments give students feedback on how
well they understand the information and on what they need to improve, while helping
teachers better design instruction. Assessment becomes even more relevant when
students become involved in their own assessment. Students taking an active role in

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

developing the scoring criteria, self-evaluation, and goal setting, more readily accept that
the assessment is adequately measuring their learning. (Edutopia, 2008) After students
presented their board game they got to play other groups board games helping me score
them. This not only taught them more information from the unit, but it also let them take
an active role in scoring the assessments.
I believe that these two artifacts show that my teaching meets the goals of domain
B in that I use exit tickets to help monitor students learning, and I create alternative
assessments to check what students have learned within a unit.

RUNNING HEAD: Domain B Literature Review

References:
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, Revisions Adopted, March 2013. California
Teaching Performance Expectations. Retrieved on November 27, 2016 from
http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/standards/adopted-TPEs-2013.pdf
Edutopia, What Are Some Types of Assessment? July 15, 2008. Retrieved
on December 14, 2016 from https://www.edutopia.org/assessment-guidedescription
Thompson, Jordan, Teach Like A Champion - Exit Ticket Retrieved on
December 14, 2016 from http://teachlikeachampionjordan.weebly.com/exitticket.html

Anda mungkin juga menyukai