Rubric Area 8 Designing Instruction

Use of New Pedagogical Knowledge in Designing Instruction

I have demonstrated the application of improved knowledge of educational theory in the design of teaching materials or lessons used in my own classroom.

    The revised lesson plan makes use of my new environmental science content knowledge whereas the original lesson plan that I had prior to my environmental course does not. My revised lesson plan is more effective than my original while I used the content I learned from my environmental science class and the theories I acquired through my pedagogy readings to design the new plan. This is proof that a teacher is also a learner and researcher, for the lesson plan improved immensely.

What this piece of evidence is...
    Lessons from the unit plan from my Baseline Portfolio that I created prior to my enrollment in the MISE program serves as the baseline evidence. The unit in my baseline Portfolio is a fifth grade unit of forces and motion: How Can Energy Be Changed to Other Forms? Each of the lessons in my baseline evidence follow Madeline Hunter's lesson plan format. The comparative work I have designed through my leadership course and capstone seminar serve as my post evidences, which includes lessons from my pedagogy capstone, a fifth grade unit on ecosystems, and a revised lesson plan. The revised lesson plan is also on ecosystems, a new unit that I taught for the first time last year when I implemented my classroom-based research. These lessons were designed very differently, for my baseline lesson was created based on the science textbook that my district provided while the revised lesson was based on how I believe students should learn. The revised lesson plan was implemented as one of the activities in my CBR while I compared the efficacy of text-based learning, observation-based learning, and web-based learning. The inquiry activities in the revised lesson were the observation-based learning where a small group of students were led to nearby woods to observe the ecosystem and collect a soil sample. A variation of this lesson was also used when I taught ecosystmes this spring. Instead of bringing students to the woods in small groups, I led my entire class to the woods and conducted the same observations.

Why I chose this and how this demonstrate the application of improved knowledge of educational theory in the design of teaching materials...
    The difference between the baseline and post evidence demonstrate my application of improved knowledge of educational theory in the design of teaching materials because the clear distinction of the quality of the plans. Though I once thought my baseline evidence is the best lesson I have created, I have been corrected during my participation in the MISE program. When I first began the program my experience in developing unit plans was minimal, and when I created units, it was with the guidance of more experienced teacher colleagues. I was not confident in using models that I had limited training in. The lessons in my Baseline Portfolio were solely based on the Madeline Hunter format that I was trained in during my undergraduate years and student teaching assignment. The post evidence lessons were developed using backwards design (Wiggins & McTighe 2005), which I was introduced to when I started teaching but never create a full unit plan utilizing backwards design thoroughly. Though I have incorporated essential questions and enduring understandings in the baseline unit plan, I don't think they were crafted very well. Since the reinforcement I received in both pedagogy courses, I continued to fine the backwards design model to be a logical way to develop lesson and unit plans. Both the lessons in my pedagogy capstone and revised lesson plan were designed by identifying the desired results first (state standards, enduring understandings), then the assessments, and finally the learning experiences. Beginning with the end in mind makes units more meaningful to me as I work towards the end as my goal while I am instructing. In addition, beginning with enduring understandings and essential questions help me to focus my students as I pose the "big question" to them in the beginning of new units. Because the model has been reinforced multiple times during my participation in the MISE program, I have become more comfortable and confident in using it to develop new units.
    In addition to using the backwards design model effectively, I have also become more comfortable in developing lessons with the use of inquiry learning. When we were asked to reflect on our use of inquiry in both pedagogy courses, I realized that inquiry was severely lacking in my science instruction as my baseline evidence shows. During the first pedagogy class, I had a vague understanding of what inquiry was, but by the second pedagogy course, I was implementing inquiry through my classroom-based research! After the completion of both courses, I was able to develop lesson plans with inquiry embedded in it with much ease. All the lessons in my pedagogy capstone have some inquiry in it, and when I revised a lesson plan in my second pedagogy class, I was able to incorporate detailed inquiry-based lessons. I continued to use inquiry this spring when I implemented my pedagogy capstone to teach ecosystems. I realize that much of my "after" evidence concentrates on environmental science, for I have made that my goal in science instruction the pass two academic years. Since taking the environmental science course, I have become more interested in environmental sciences than ever before, and I recognize that that has influenced my instructional goals: refine the teaching and deepen the concepts of ecosystems. Luckily, I was able to do so because I believe my instruction on human body systems has constistently been strong, and for the pass two years our media specialist/librarian has been leading my students in astronomy research and inquiry. My instruction of ecosystems this year is how I envisioned inquiry teaching to be; therefore, next year I look forward to concentrating on refining my instruction on forces and motion.
    Another thing I learned through various content courses in addition to the pedagogy courses is that it is important to clear student misconceptions. Students may have preconceived notions that need to be corrected, and a preassessment is useful to clear any or all misconceptions. In my pedagogy capstone, I did exactly that: create a preassessment to determine student misconceptions. Below, I have included excerpts of my pedagogy capstone and revised lesson plan as my post evidence.

Baseline evidence taken from the unit plan in my Baseline Portfolio: