TEACHER WORK SAMPLE

JUSTIN AVERY WILEY

MAY 9, 2012

9TH GRADE WORLD HISTORY

UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA

ITE 406: SEMINAR IN TEACHING RESIDENCY

Table of Contents

Section I: Context for Learning and Plans for Accommodation 3

Section II: Long Term Unit Plan & Pre-Unit Assessment 8

Section III: Unit Implementation and Post Assessment 14

Section IV: Self-Evaluation and Implications for Professional Growth 21

AppendicesAppendix A: Class Survey: Student Learning Preference Scale (LPSS) 26Appendix B: Results from LPSS 27Appendix C: Student Responses to Formative Assessment: Framing an Inquiry Question 28Appendix D: Unit Plan – The Industrial Revolution 29Appendix E: Lesson Plan 1: What's My Mountain? 30Appendix F: Lesson Plan 2: Plain Vanilla 32Appendix G: Pre- and Post-Test Class Data 33Appendix H: Pre- and Post-Test Student Responses (Emmie) 34Appendix I: Post-Test Student Response (Enrique) 35Appendix J: Classroom Management Cheat Sheet 36

References 37

2

Section 1: Context for Learning and Plans for Accommodation

For my year of observation and student teaching I had the honor of working with Cooperating

Teacher, Molly Satta-Ellis at Konawaena High School (my alma mater). Molly teaches two periods of

senior Sociology/Psychology and four periods of 9th grade World History. For the spring semester I took

over three of her World History periods (Pds. 2, 4, & 6). I chose to feature period 6 for my detailed

analysis of unit implementation and assessments, since quite a bit of action occurred in that period,

leading to many valuable lessons learned. I also chose to feature my experience implementing a unique

method of inquiry-based learning, known as Philosophy for Children, since this method has long been

close to my heart. This is the story of my student teaching.

Community, School and Classroom Factors

Konawaena is located in Kealakekua, a district of South Kona, on the Big Island of Hawaii. The

total population of the South Kona school complex is 10,7121. Kona is still a “small town” covering a

large geographic area. South Kona residents hold a similar social economic status to other rural

communities in the state. The median household income is about $7,800 below the state median, the

percentage of families headed by a single mother is 2% higher than the state, and the percentage of

families living in poverty is 1.3% higher than the state. The number of KHS students receiving free or

reduced lunch in SY10-11 was 348 (52% of the student body).

Like with any other school, Konawaena has a unique set of challenges. Students at Konawaena

come from a unique cultural context, and there are specific salient factors that a good teacher will be

aware of and responsive to—factors surrounding the community, school and classroom.

A salient factor that characterizes the community surrounding Konawaena is that of local culture.

Local culture is an amalgam of Hawaiian culture and the many cultures that immigrated to Hawaii over

the past century and a half, originally to work the sugar plantations. It is generally characterized by a

1 Unless otherwise noted, numbers are drawn from the Konawaena High School Educational and Fiscal Accountability Trend Report and the School Status and Improvement Report for School Year 2010-2011.

3

“laid back” or relaxed outlook on life, a valuing of Polynesian culture and activities (hunting, surfing,

paddling), a propensity for socializing in the “talk story” style, and a respect for parental authority.

A salient factor surrounding the school as whole is the school-wide adoption of a computer

program called JupiterGrades. This program not only keeps track of student grades, assignments,

attendance, and behavior logs, but also serves as an effective medium for parent communication.

Because the program has been adopted school-wide, there is consistency in the mode of

communicating grades to families. And because my mentor teacher was the one who spearheaded the

push for school-wide adoption of the program, she made it a point from our first day together to

familiarize me with its settings and functions. I use it to quickly email weekly grade reports to the

families of my 76 students. I also have student contact info entered, allowing access to JupiterGrades

whenever I need a to make a call home. It's nice not to have to carry around a grade-book to do so.

A salient factor in the classroom that stands out to me is the seating arrangement. Like every new

teacher will, I have learned the power of the seating chart, how simply relocating a few talkative students

can completely shift the dynamic of the classroom. But seating in our classroom has become not only a

classroom management matter but also a pedagogy matter.

For fourth quarter I decided to focus my teaching in a new direction, utilizing the methodology of

“Philosophy for Children” (P4C). P4C is a teaching style I was first exposed to as an undergraduate at

the University of Hawaii, and which has recently gained statewide attention as the secret behind the

success of 2012 Hawaii state teacher of the year, Chad Miller.

Student Diversity and Background Needs

Konawaena students represent the melting pot of plantation cultures which first immigrated to

Hawaii, as well as some of the more recent immigrations (Mexican and Micronesian). According to the

School Status and Improvement Report, students represent 16 different ethnicities, the most dominant

being Native Hawaiian (33.8%), White (20.4%), Filipino (12.6%), Japanese (11.1%), Hispanic (9.1%),

4

and Micronesian (5.0%). These six dominant ethnicities are represented in each of my three periods. In

my 6th period, students tend to group themselves along these lines. This is most obvious when our tables

are arranged in “island” table clusters for group work, as the groups tend to be quite homogeneous.

Therefore a salient factor I have observed surrounding student diversity is that of “click-ism,” or

social grouping in the classroom. Four distinct groups have stood out in my 6 th period—the Locals

(majority of the class, dominant, many of them loud, jovial, goofing off, task avoidant), the Mexicans

(minority, strong solidarity, range in literacy), the Haole emo girls (gifted, but often apathetic,

intellectually far ahead of the class, culturally quite isolated in this community), and the Japanese

athletes (focused high achievers, quite independent).

I selected these four “clicks” as a salient factor for a few reasons. First, in planning instruction, I

would like to differentiate in a way that I can meet all types of student. Because the subject matter of

World History is, itself, so diverse, I aimed to incorporate the range of ethnicities into my lesson

planning. For example, when selecting which revolution they would study for our Revolutions unit, I

allowed students who represented the ethnicity of the region of choice to have first pick at studying that

revolution.

The next salient factor I'd like to discuss regards the background needs of my students. There is a

problem that teachers have observed across the entire freshman class this year: a large percentage of the

students are frequently missing assignments, often to the point of receiving a failing grade. Whether they

are losing their assignment, completing then failing to turn it in, or not completing it all, it has become

quite common for only half the class to turn in a homework assignment on it’s due date. As a result, over

30% of the freshman class has an F in one or more classes.

This phenomenon, which I have endearingly labeled “Freshmenitis,” has a lot of the veteran

Konawaena teachers somewhat perplexed. While there is always some transitional struggle from

intermediate to high school, they've never found it to be this pronounced. Implications at the school-

5

wide level have been to institute mandatory study hall for any students with an F, and to develop better

study habits by introducing the AVID curriculum, a college-readiness program. Some practical ways I've

responded to the situation is to always make extra copies of an assignment, to be flexible with my late

and makeup policy, and to spend extra time with individuals during study hall, tutoring or helping

organize their work.

Student Learning Approaches

In my classes I have tried to incorporate varied groupings into my lesson planning. I prefer to

keep my lecturing to a minimum, and allow group work over individual work whenever possible.

Sometimes, however, students would grumble at the groupings I chose, either because they don't like the

people they are assigned to work with, because they work at a different pace than their peers, or because

they prefer to simply work alone. Some of my students are quite introverted, rarely socializing with any

of their peers, and perhaps group work is a source of anxiety for them.

To gain more information about my students' preferences in this area, I chose to administer the

Learning Preference Scale for Students (LPSS) (see Appendix A). This simple survey classifies students

according to their strength of response in three categories: competitive learning, cooperative learning,

and individual learning. At the end of the survey I included questions about students' available

technology at home, as well as feedback about their interests and general learning needs.

The findings of the survey (see Appendix B) are as follows: On average the students tend to

prefer cooperative learning the most and competitive learning the least (Items A, B, and C). They also

tend to prefer interaction with their peers over individualized learning (Items D and E). These findings

are expected, and support my propensity toward assigning group work.

I administered the survey quite late in the school year and did not find time to reflect on their

results until recently. I did, however, learn a bit more about my students through this process and was

surprised by some students' preference for competitive or individual learning. I now take that into

6

consideration when assigning group work.

Administering this survey was a good exercise for me. It was my first survey, and I learned a bit

about quantitative research in the process. In the future I would use this and other surveys to gather

information about my students, but I would utilize an online program such as SurveyMonkey or JunoEd,

to avoid the hours of time it spent scoring the individual surveys.

Accommodations and Equitable Environment

In my three periods, I have three SpEd students and one 504. Having reviewed and discussed

their IEP goals with Molly, I have incorporated the following accommodations into my classroom: I will

write all important communication on the board, including the date, standard, umbrella questions, daily

agenda, homework assignments, assignments due, and warm-up (usually on Prometheon). For students

whose IEP requests it, I will provide extra time on tests and assignments. I will communicate student

progress through JupiterGrades, weekly grade report emails, and calling the parents of failing students.

By utilizing the P4C method of inquiry, I hope to engage the more gifted students as well, by

providing a space for them to share their insights and opinions, and to take their thinking to a deeper

level. Doing P4C feels a lot more like “talking story” than school, which I'm hoping will better engage

the locals. I want to ease into curriculum by reading sources of greater interest, less like regular classes

and more like a graduate seminar. I want it to be fun.

My prediction with these accommodations is that I will meet the essential needs of all my

students, but that those with the greatest need will be attended to through my awareness of their IEP or

general classroom behavior. Students should light up at the opportunity to discuss the content through

the context of their own lives and interests. As needs and certain behaviors arise, I will communicate

with parents regularly and immediately.

7

STEP II – Unit Plan & Pre-Unit Assessment

Unit Plan Narrative

Toward the end of 3rd quarter, I had become somewhat frustrated with my own teaching. My

methods, while incorporating Molly's dynamic group projects and effective variations of instruction, still

felt so teacher-directed, much like the “pouring-in” method of instruction I had become disenchanted

with long ago. I felt like an an over-worked entertainer, laboring long every night to plan a great show

for a passively receptive audience, and facing a tough crowd each morning. Most of the kids didn't

despise what I was doing, but even the most amicable ones seemed like they would have chosen to be

somewhere other than my class, were they indeed given the choice.

Now a student-teacher with my own classroom, I found myself subjecting my students to the

same things I despised as a Konawaena student long ago—worksheets, aimed at filling their cups with

knowledge that seemed anything but relevant to their personal lives and interests.

I shared this frustration with Molly, and that I felt like the students might come alive more if

given the opportunity to relate with the subject matter through facilitated discussion and inquiry. She

replied enthusiastically that for years she'd been wanting to try more inquiry-based methods in her class.

I warned her that it would involve dramatic changes to our classroom culture, such as rearranging the

desks in a circle, and slowing down the pace of instruction enough to build the kind of community where

this sort of inquiry can occur. I am still amazed her response. Not only did she say to go for it, but she

expected that I'd be writing weekly lesson plans for her, as she'd be replicating my methods in her 7 th

period.

A motivation to me for building an Inquiry Community was to more effectively reach one of the

General Learning Outcomes (GLOs) which I felt was frequently overlooked in my previous lessons—

Complex Thinker.

Since my first day with these students, I had the HCPS III standard we were working towards

8

clearly written out on the board. We would always review it as a class, and take a little time to discuss

what it meant. But we had never reviewed the language of the rubric, which provides feedback toward

how effectively we have met the standard. For example, one benchmark which we spent a lot of time on

was SS 11.3.6: Examine the major developments in European cultural and intellectual history, including

the Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, and Scientific Revolution. We certainly did “examine”

each of these events, to a degree. However, upon reading the benchmark rubric (Figure 1), I wondered

how thorough our examination was, and how we might determine that.

Figure 1: Example of Social Studies Benchmark Rubric

Had the students made “significant connections, insights, and generalizations?” Do they even

know what a connection or a generalization is? If so, then by what criteria would they determine

whether it was significant or not? It was my suspicion that they had never been given the opportunity to

think through the meaning of these concepts, and what it might look like for them personally. I resolved,

then, that our “hitting” of that benchmark must have been somewhere between “Proficient” and

“Partially Proficient,” for even the best students in the class.

One reason I decided to use the P4C approach was that I saw it as a way to better meet the 'fine

print' of the standards. When the target of the benchmark is to “make significant connections, insights,

and generalizations,” I want to give the kids space to actually do so by exploring the material and

engaging with it on their own terms.

With Molly's approval, I chose to begin this new approach at the start of 4 th quarter, when the

kids are fresh, having just returned from spring break. Our projected unit of study at that time will be the

Industrial Revolution (HCPS III – SS 3.11.8), so I decided to make it the featured unit plan for this

9

Teacher Work Sample.

The unit focus will begin with the students' personal lives, and gradually branch outward, until

engaging them with the historical event of the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain. It will end with a

structured inquiry session, through which they can discuss the aspects of the content that are most

meaningful to them, hopefully making connections, insights, and even generalizations.

Our first objective will be building an intellectually safe community, where the students can

become comfortable to share and discuss the content. In P4C, this is begun through the activity of

making a Community Ball,For2 (Days 1 & 2). Next, the students will learn how to relate with a subject

in a less teacher-directed fashion through the skill of annotations. They will practice their first

annotations and discussion on some song lyrics (Day 3), which ease them into this process, while

bridging the content of the standard to a more personally relevant subject. Before introducing the actual

content, they will take a written pretest (Day 4). We will unpack the language of the standard a bit,

watch a short documentary, and begin thinking about what makes a good philosophical question. Next,

they'll experience the subject through an enacted simulation activity (Day 5). Finally, they'll read a

source (from the textbook) as a class, and discuss it together through a guided inquiry activity known as

“Plain Vanilla”3 (Days 6 & 7). This is followed by a written essay response as the final exam.

The outcomes I am targeting are as follows: They will have a thoughtful understanding of the

HCPS III benchmark (SS11.3.8), able to “describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial

revolution, making significant connections, insights, and generalizations.” They will grow as complex

thinkers (GLO) as they learn to frame better questions, critique and reflect on their own thinking, and as

effective communicators (GLO) as they gain confidence and experience sharing their viewpoints before

the whole class.

2 For detailed instructions on making a Community Ball, see Jackson, T., & Butnor, A. L. (n.d.). The Start-up Kit Lessons for Young Beginners 3rd Edition. (www.p4chawaii.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/StartUp-Kit-3.pdf )

3 This activity is described in great detail in Jackson, T. (1989). A Guide For Teachers. (www.p4chawaii.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/TeachGuide.pdf)

10

Description of Multiple Assessments

I selected two formative assessments and one summative assessment to feature, in order to

provide a snapshot of the student learning that occurs during this unit (see Figure 2).

The first formative assessment, the pre-test, poses the exact wording of the HCPS III benchmark

(SS11.3.8) as an essay prompt: “Describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial revolution.” I

merely chopped up a screenshot of the standard, pasting the benchmark at the top of the page, the

proficiency rubric at the bottom, and a response box in the middle, then made copies and gave it to the

kids. I had made it a goal not to simply throw technical language at the kids without discussing its

meaning together. So I aimed to expose them to the standard as much as possible during this unit,

unpacking the language of both the benchmark and rubric, to really think through how proficiently we

were actually meeting it. The benchmark just happened to be worded ideally for an essay prompt.

For the second formative assessment (see Appendix C), students will compose a philosophical

Inquiry Question for use during the inquiry stage of the Plain Vanilla activity4. After completing the

reading together as a class, students will be given time to frame a question about what we've just read

together, then write it on the board, along with their name and the page number that elicited the question.

The class will then vote on which question they'd like to discuss first during inquiry time. I chose to

feature this assessment because it reveals the emergence of the student's questioning skill, a necessary

step in the inquiry process. It also hints at the students' understanding of the content, as well as their

particular area of interest within the content. Each of these give me good formative feedback as a

teacher, through which I can determine the class's readiness for a philosophically rich inquiry time.

The summative assessment I chose to feature is a modification of the pretest. The framing of the

question has been made more explicit, and guiding parameters have been placed on the content

4 A complete Plain Vanilla session includes 5 stages: 1) Read something together as a class, 2) Come up with questions on what we just read, 3) Vote on which question to discuss first, 4) Do inquiry together as a community, self regulating our quality of thinking and intellectual safety, and 5) Evaluate how we did, based on criterion we've established together as a community (from Jackson (2001) The Art and Craft of Gently Socratic Inquiry).

11

discussed by providing a vocabulary list of 15 words. Students are requested to utilize six or more of

these words in their response, demonstrating an understanding of each word through its use. The same

rubric from the standard is used as the content criteria of assessment, and a second criteria has been

added to the rubric: “understanding and use of vocabulary.” I made these modifications to make the

expectations more clear, in response to some questions I was getting from the kids during the pre-test,

and also to provide guidelines on how thorough I expect a good response to be.

The pre- and post-test assessments address the standard word-for-word. They also address

students' complex thinker GLO by requesting students make connections, insights, and generalizations.

They elicit thinking in the Bloom's Taxonomy cognitive levels of Knowledge, Comprehension, and

Application (Bloom, 1956). The Inquiry Question also addresses the complex thinker GLO, requiring

that students apply their understanding of the content to the framing of a fruitful question.

Accommodations for each of these will include allowing extra time for students that need it, and

providing opportunity for corrections and make-ups of the post-test. I also anticipate that some students

will need one-to-one assistance in framing their Inquiry question.

Figure 2: Assessments Featured

Aligned HCPS III Benchmark

Assessment Method of Assessment

Level of Thinking (Bloom's Taxonomy)

Adaptations in keeping with special needs

SS11.3.8,Complex Thinker (GLO)

Pre-assessment Written essay response

Knowledge, comprehension, application,

Allow extra time if needed

SS11.3.8,Complex Thinker (GLO)

Formative Framing an inquiry question

Application Help struggling students by modeling other examples, brainstorming with them

SS11.3.8,Complex Thinker (GLO)

Summative Written guided essay response

Knowledge, comprehension, application,

Allow extra time if needed,Allow make-ups, corrections, improvements

Unit Map and Lesson Plans

See Appendices D, E, & F for the featured unit plan and two featured lesson plans.

12

Student Exemplars and Pre-Unit Assessment Results

I selected two academically contrasting students to track throughout this unit and have used

pseudonyms to discuss the two. I will go into greater detail about their results on the three assessments.

Emmie is a quirky, artsy girl whose family moved to Hawaii from New York some time after she

was born. She is a consistent member of the “Haole emo girls” group mentioned earlier. Emmie is a very

gifted student and can effectively communicate her thoughts in writing. She is eloquently expressive

when engaged one-to-one, but very quiet and observant during class-time.

She is often doodling or commenting on her surroundings though notes in her journal. When a

huge conflict occurred in class, Emmie was one of the girls I consulted because I did not manage to

catch all the precipitating events. Emmie helpful in filling in many details so that I could properly move

forward in resolving the conflict.

Enrique is the quintessential class clown. Socially confident, he floats from table to table,

engaging whatever party will entertain him, especially if he can pull them off-task. Enrique is a very

pleasant student, but hardly ever on task. Even with continual prompting, he will almost always return to

socializing (or staring blankly) unless I sit next to him, overseeing his work. He is an excellent example

of the FSS (Freshman Slacker Syndrome), though most cases are not nearly this pronounced.

The class-wide average on the pre-test was 8.1 out of 12 points possible (68%) (See Appendix

G). This is exceptionally high for a pre-test, partly because of the number of high achieving students

registered in this period, and possibly because some have prior experience in this subject. Emmie scored

an 11 (92%), providing a thorough response and revealing a great prior knowledge of the subject (See

Appendix H). Enrique scored a 6 (50%), putting minimal effort into the assessment (Appendix I). While

it is possible he truly didn't have anything to say on the subject, it is my suspicion that he was avoiding

the task, a behavior he’s consistently demonstrated.

13

Step III – Unit Implementation and Unit-Analysis of Student Learning

Key Insights

On Day Three of implementing this unit, a conflict erupted during 6th Period which thoroughly

rattled me as a teacher, as well as the whole class, necessitating the involvement of the administration

and about seven students' families.

After spending two days building community and discussing intellectual safety, it was time to

introduce our first content source. I had selected the lyrics of the song Hawaii 78 by Izrael

Kamakawiwo'ole, because it is a familiar song and I wanted to draw in the Native Hawaiian kids that I

had long seen disengaging, some of them requesting more “Hawaii” subjects. It also seemed a good

bridge into our new unit, since the theme of the lyrics is change associated with the modernization of

Hawaii—closely related to the changes that first occurred in England under the Industrial Revolution.

The students listened to the song together as a class, while making annotations on a printed copy

of the lyrics. Then we held a class discussion on the topic, taking turns with the community ball,

listening to each other, and sharing our thoughts—a typical step for a developing inquiry community.

Everything seemed to be going well. I made it through two periods with little challenge. Then,

during the discussion portion of 6th period, one of the more gifted but socially challenged girls made a

comment about Hawaiian ownership of land, which came across sounding arrogant. Several local girls

on the opposite end of the class began verbally berating her. Some of the boys jumped at the opportunity

to see some action and began cheering on the conflict. I stood up and commanded silence but not before

several abusive comments had been exchanged. In my inexperience, I did not reprimand the individuals

at fault, but rather addressed the intellectual safety of the class as a whole, striving to normalize the

situation and directed them toward our desired aim of eventually having a fruitful discussion.

But the class had become too heated. As I talked on, angry girls stewed while immature boys

egged them on, like spectators at a coliseum. The tension in the room could be cut with a knife. By the

14

time the bell rang, at least 6 students had made abusive (or threatening) remarks, a few had walked out

of the class, and a small minority of students were feeling attacked and unsafe. Immediately after school

I got a call from the mother of the girl who had made the original comment. She was quite upset.

Looking back on that day, I see how several factors converged in creating a favorable

environment for the conflict—the perfect storm, if you will.

First and foremost, my weak classroom management was to blame. I was brought face-to-face

with the consequence of my deeply entrenched timidity in dealing with misbehavior. As a result,

students had not only lost respect for me as an authority role, but unaddressed adverse behaviors had

polarized the class, creating factions that were frustrated with each other.

Second, some circumstances beyond my control had strained my rapport with the class. While I

had spent all last semester getting to know periods 2 & 4 during my Observation credit hours, I was not

able to do so with period 6 due to a scheduling conflict with my job at the time. Therefore we had started

the semester with zero rapport, a problem I underestimated and never made time to properly remedy.

This was exacerbated by the fact that 6th period meets after lunch, when both the kids and I are taxed and

tired – equating more rowdy behaviors from the kids and less attentive responses from me.

Finally, the subject matter I chose for the activity was far too controversial for an emerging

inquiry community. In a healthy inquiry, there is often disagreement, as the participants critique each

others' thinking and labor toward a better, more thought-out and deeper truth. But this requires a culture

of intellectual safety, otherwise disagreements polarize and ostracize, or worse. The lyrics of Hawaii 78,

while an excellent topic of discussion for a mature inquiry community, proved disastrous for our 3-day

old, highly volatile community.

Gratefully, the story doesn't end here. That weekend (the conflict happened on a Friday) I made a

few calls home to parents of the students most clearly at fault. The parents agreed that their daughters

would talk with me prior to the next class, and write letters of apology to the victimized girl. The

15

following day I came to school to find that administration had been involved, and one of the students

had, over the weekend, posted a bullying comment on her Facebook. Still, Molly wanted to give me the

opportunity to put out these fires and learn from the situation. The administration supported her and I am

forever grateful, as either could have chosen to relieve me of my responsibilities as student teacher.

With a renewed sense of confidence, I gathered more information from the perspective of the

students, made more calls home to parents to candidly inform them of what had happened and discuss

actions for reconciliation. At the following class, I made key seating changes, upon Molly's suggestion.

Then I discussed the conflict, sharing what follow-up I'd done over the weekend and owning up to my

mistakes. I then initiated a “Once-Around” of the Community Ball, allowing everyone who wished to

share their take on the conflict (much like the Hawaiian process of ho'oponopono). I followed this

immediately with an icebreaker community-building activity called “What's My Mountain.”5 This

activity gave the class space to get to know each other better, and practice listening by keeping a note

record of everything shared. I was amazed that some of the kids didn't even know each other’s names.

The classroom culture in 6th period began to improve greatly on that day. First, some badly

needed rapport was built and mended between the students and I, and between students, as they learned

about things they had in common, or perhaps did not expect from each other (or from me). Second, they

witnessed how bad the class could potentially get without order, and were not eager to return there.

Lastly, and probably most significant, I grew in my confidence with classroom management. I learned

the power of prevention through simple seating rearrangements. I learned to be firm with behaviors, and

clear and consistent with expectations. These are reflected in a classroom management “cheat sheet” I

later put together, upon reflecting with Molly on this and other issues (see Appendix J).

5 This was a modified version of an activity I learned during my studies in the University of Hawaii at Manoa Sparks M. Matsunaga Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution. Students are given two minutes to write down their most memorable Mountain, Beach, Valley, Neighborhood, and Hero, then two minutes to share with a partner. Partners then present each other's information to the whole class during circle time. It is based on an indigenous model, and relevant for Hawaii residents, where there is a strong connection to place.

16

Curricular Changes and Unit Grading Plan

The conflict I just discussed necessitated the first of several changes I would have to make to the

original unit plan, as the result of unforeseen circumstances. After the conflict, certain things had to be

added in, shifted around, or skipped over altogether, as I responded to the slightly diverging needs of my

three periods. These changes, most notable on Days Four, Five, and Six of the unit plan (see Figure 3),

led to spending an extra week on the unit, and set me on two different courses in my three periods

which, thankfully, I managed to converge again on the 4th week.

I had to make some creative grading judgments as well. Because a lot of the time was spent in

discussion, I assigned a lot of participation credit, using the students' journal notes as evidence of

participation. Weekly self-evaluation rubrics were also given, through which students graded themselves

in the criterion of their personal listening and intellectual safety, participation, and depth of thinking.

I adopted the same grading breakdown Molly used from the beginning of the year: 25%

Assignments, 25% Participation, 25% Tests, and 25% Projects. This was designed so that the different

forms of assessment weighed each other out. The challenge was to assign similar numbers of

assessments in each category so as not to flood one category with inflation (generating many low value

assignments), while neglecting another (creating a precariously highly-weighted exam grade). I can't say

I was always successful in this task, and often the grade book became a bit oppressive in the process.

Post-Analysis of Academic and Affective Growth

Looking at whole class data for period 6, there was a definite improvement, from a class average

of 68% on the pre-test to an 84% on the post-test (see Appendix G). This could be due to a number of

reasons. For one, the post-test was made into a take-home exam, due to time constraints, and therefore

students were able to take their time and work on it with their home resources. I took this into account

when grading, marking them with higher expectations on the post-test than the pre-test. But the data

does seem to indicate learning during the unit. Some students had nothing to say on the pre-test, simply

17

Figure 3: Comparison of Unit Planned and Actual Pacing

Wk Day Unit Pacing - Planned Unit Pacing - Actual

1 Day 1M

Community Ball activity Community Ball activity

Day 2W

Finish Community Ball and discuss Finish Community Ball and discuss

Day 3F

Hawaii 78 annotations and discussion Hawaii 78 annotations and discussion(***Conflict in Pd.6***)

2 M Holiday – no school

Day 4W

Pretest Unpacking the Standard, Video and annotations“What makes a good philosophical question? (Introduce Good Thinker's Toolkit)

Pd.2&4: Pretest, Unpacking the Standard, Video and annotations,“What makes a good philosophical question?”Pd.6: Addressing Friday's conflict,Once-Around to discuss the conflict,(Community restoring)“What's My Mountain?” activity (Community building)

Day 5F

Factory Experience Simulation Pd.2&4: Continue discussion: “What makes a good philosophical question?”Good Thinker's Toolkit & Magic Words - Make personal set (Inquiry-community equipping)Pd.6: Finish “What's My Mountain?” activity Good Thinker's Toolkit & Magic Words - Make personal set

3 Day 6M

Plain Vanilla activity Pd.2&4: Group Expert activity (Content building)Pd.6: Pretest,Unpacking the Standard (very brief)Begin Group Expert activity

Day 7W

Finish Plain Vanilla; Final Exam essay(if time) begin personal sets of Good Thinker's Toolkits and Magic Words

Pd.2&4: Finish Group Expert activityPd.6: Finish Group Expert activity, Video and Annotations

F Holiday – no school

4 Day 8M

Begin next Unit Factory Experience Simulation

Day 9W

Plain Vanilla activity

Day 10F

Finish Plain Vanilla,Hmwrk: Take home Final Exam essay

18

writing “I don't know anything about this topic,” then scored a 71% on a post-test. To me, that is

evidence of learning.

Emmie, however, was an exception to the norm, actually scoring lower on her post-test (79%)

than on her pre-test (92%). She clearly put far less effort into her take home exam. I suspect one reason

was a growing sense of apathy with all the changes I’d made this quarter. Since only 10 out of 26

students turned in an exam, this indicates much of the class didn’t care about their grade or were unclear

about expectations.

Enrique didn’t turn in an exam, which is consistent with his behavior throughout the quarter. He

seemed to respond well to the circle format of the class, but my only evidence is his dispositions while in

class, as he produced little to no written work. Relocating his seat next to mine in the circle did help with

his attention. Because of our good rapport he responded well to this accommodation.

I was impressed by the class's affective performance on the “Framing an Inquiry Question”

assessment (see Appendix C). The goal of the activity was to get them to think in terms of bigger, open-

ended questions, initiating from their personal interests in response to the content. I measured their

success by the complexity (or “open-ended-ness”) of the questions they came up with. But I don’t know

how much of their affective growth (as Complex Thinkers) I can associate with this unit in particular,

since I did not pre-test for this quality.

Their questions ranged from ones that could be quickly answered by looking up the facts (e.g.,

“What were the wages like?”) to broader questions that elicit deeper levels of thinking (e.g., “How

would the world be different without the Industrial Revolution?”). Enrique wrote his question—“Why

was everything so simple?”—after nearly all the questions were up on the board, only after my continual

prompting. Because of his chronic resistance throughout the semester, I view his simply participating in

the activity as a form of success. Emmie's question—“What might have been the cost if someone from

the higher class had spoken up against the treatment of workers?”—reflected the kind of thinking I was

19

hoping to bring the class to through this activity. I suspect her reasoning was already at a high level prior

to the unit, but she perhaps grew in confidence with framing/sharing her ideas, through the course of the

unit (Effective Communicator).

20

Step IV – Self-Evaluation and Implications for Professional Growth

Notable student learning

So often education is rushed. Teachers and

administration are rushed by top-down expectations, and

the rush is passed on to the students. They are taught that

we do not have time to study a subject in depth because

there are more standards to cover, looming on the horizon.

A mantra in the world of P4C is that “We're not in a rush to

get anywhere. That doesn't mean we're not going

somewhere” (Jackson, 2001). I knew that we would need

to be reminded of this statement throughout this new

approach, therefore I printed it out in large font, framed and laminated it, and spread it as a banner across

an upper wall of the classroom.

I believe I had a most notable impact on my students by giving them space to reflect on the

content as well as their own learning at a deeper level. We took time to create that space through

community building / restoring activities (Making the Community Ball, What's My Mountain), and we

took time to equip them for that task (by making our own Good Thinker's Toolkit and Magic Words6).

6 The Good Thinker's Toolkit and Magic Words are pedagogical tools used by the teacher and other members of the Inquiry Community for regulating the community's thinking and intellectual safety (see Jackson (2001)).

21

They were also given time to reflect on and evaluate their own thinking, participation, and listening,

through informal end-of-class thumbs-up/down/middle evaluations, and weekly self-evaluation rubrics.

Students were given space to share and discuss topics that mattered to them, relating the subjects to their

personal lives.

Lastly, I was able to communicate to the students that their work—ideas, comments, insights,

participation, journal entries, questions—mattered. I rarely

assigned even a worksheet or a warm-up that they weren't

given time to reflect upon and share with the class afterward.

Simply arranging the desks into a circle communicated that

each person's participation was valuable enough for them to

be seen and heard by the entire class. My joining the circle as

a co-inquirer and participating in the activities I asked of them communicated that the things we were

doing together mattered to me as well.

Limits of student learning

I struggled in so many ways this semester. My classroom management grew leaps and bounds,

but not before hampering the learning of many as a result of a chronically rowdy class environment. My

unit and lesson preparations, though I put extensive after-hours work into them, were often incomplete

or last minute, especially during the first half of the semester. As I progressed, I learned that I was

obsessing over hugely time-consuming but noncritical details of lessons, and needed to learn to simply

produce, even in imperfection. I identified timeliness in preparations as a target for 4th quarter, and

managed to stay about a week ahead of the kids in planning throughout the quarter.

Lastly, the implementation of an inquiry-based learning style presented many challenges. The

theories and training I had long stewed over throughout my undergraduate and graduate studies reached

the 'hard pavement' of reality in the classroom this semester. I learned that kids don't naturally gravitate

22

toward philosophical discussion just because you've allowed space for it. They are so used to searching

for the answers in the teacher's head, that the idea of providing their own answers—or properly framing

their own questions—seems to fry their circuits. They needed much more equipping for the inquiry

process than I was able to provide in the limited time we had together. I also discovered huge gaps in my

own understanding of how to effectively establish and implement an inquiry community.

Most notably, the kids at a certain point became starved for content. After the honeymoon

intrigue with the new seating arrangement and fuzzy ball wore off, many of them began to complain

about the process taking a very long time, and wanting to return to “real schooling.” Some commented

that the process felt disturbingly like group therapy, something I could have remedied by better teaching

the Good Thinker's Toolkit, to promote intellectual rigor and scrutiny in the types of comments shared.

Often I didn't know exactly where the process should be going, and therefore wasn't quick enough to

direct it to the most fruitful end.

In the future I would want to draw upon a greater store of activities for equipping the students for

metacognition, deepening their thinking, and building community and intellectual safety, all through

content-rich mediums specific to the standards we are covering. This was the vision from the onset, but

these tools and activities needed to be refined and created. That took time, and I wasn't always

successful. I'm not sure if this process has ever been done in a high school world history class before. If

so, the lessons and activities they used would have been very helpful for my task.

Demonstration of COE conceptual framework

The University of Hawaii College of Education conceptual framework holds the following core

values as goals for its teacher candidates: a) to contribute to a just and democratic society, and b) to

develop knowledgeable, effective and caring teachers. I have definitely grown in these areas, evidenced

by the following examples.

As one who believes strongly in raising a generation of social justice advocates, I have put a

23

special emphasis on justice issues throughout my student teaching. I first introduced a “Justice Journal”

activity during my Observation semester, in which I had the students create a personal journal through

which they would record their reflections on social justice issues. They had just seen the play, The Diary

of Anne Frank, and I wanted them to consider the possibility of their own journals one day being found

and used for societal change, as Anne Frank's was. Unfortunately, I flooded them with about 10 different

issues of injustice for them to research, and perhaps bit off more than I could chew on that first lesson.

This semester we spent a week and a half on the Invisible Children curriculum. We first took

time to reflect on our lack of knowledge about the continent of Africa, and potential reasons for this

disparity (particularly the media). We eventually watched the Invisible Children: Rough Cut DVD, then

spent the following day discussing their journal reflections on the topic and brainstorming potential

projects they could undergo to take action on the issue of child soldiers and night commuters.

Now studying World War II, we will be watching Schindler's List as a class, then spending our

final Plain Vanilla discussing the Holocaust and students' questions generated from the film.

I have grown as a knowledgeable educator both through my quality training in the program

coursework, and my experience in the field under the mentorship of a master teacher. My effectiveness is

most evident through my gains in classroom management and unit/lesson planning, both of which were

put through the crucible this semester. I kept an up-to-date pacing guide through the entire 4th quarter,

planning units in advance and submitting them to Molly so that she could replicate them in her own 7 th

period. The experience I gained through resolving a heated class conflict, mediating between students,

following up with families and administration, then refining my own classroom management skills

moving forward has been invaluable. Lastly, my caring for the students has only improved, and would

be evidenced by exceedingly long after-hours time put into this semester, as well as individual one-to-

one interactions with students. I have always tried to prioritize the individual when they took the

initiative or asked for help. Just now I responded to a student emailing about her grade. Last quarter I

24

helped Enrique thoroughly reorganize his binder, subject by subject, assignment by assignment. We

spent all of study hall, as well as at least an hour after school. I was impressed by his commitment to the

process of getting organized, so I matched it with my own.

Professional Development Needs/Goals

I have some clear professional development goals in mind, moving forward. I would like to

continue developing my classroom management muscles, first through some powerful summer reading. I

have a copy of Fred Jones' Tools For Teaching sitting on my shelf, which I would like to digest, as well

as Doug Lemov's Teach Like A Champion. I might also reread Harry Wong's The First Days of School to

brush up on my knowledge of effective procedures. More than anything, however, I need to simply keep

teaching. I have studied educational theories and methods for a long time, but nothing could have

prepared me for teaching quite like good old-fashioned experience. I aim to find another job in the

classroom, staying as close as possible to these daily lessons, so that the ones I've acquired in the

trenches do not relapse.

I would also like to receive further training and experience in the Philosophy for Children

method. I have many questions now, having gone through a solid quarter of it in practice. Mainly, I

would like to develop a better personal store of effective lessons and activities, as discussed earlier. I

want to get better at building community and intellectual safety, and at equipping students for deepening

their own thinking. And I want to learn to meet these goals in concert with an effective delivery of

standards-based content.

My student teaching experience was far from perfect. It was wrought with failures, among the

occasional success. But I wouldn't trade the experience of those failures for anything—certainly not

classes or book knowledge. More than anything I learned to persevere. I learned that my body is capable

of navigating much higher levels of stress than I formerly thought possible. And I got to see lights turn

on in the eyes of individual students. That alone made it all worth it.

25

Appendix A: Class Survey: Learning Preferences Scale for Students (LPSS)

26

Appendix B: Results of Learning Preference Scale for Students (SLPS)

27

Item A: Cooperative learning preference (10-40)Item B: Competitive learning preference (10-40)Item C: Individualized learning preference (10-40)Item D: Combined Involvement Score (Cooperative + Competitive: An indication for their desire to contact w/ others during the learning process)Item E: Cooperative Involvement Score (Cooperative – Competitive: An indication of the relative strength of the cooperative preference within the general desire for contact with others for learning)

Survey return rate: 21 out of 27 (78%) (Italics indicate no survey received from that student)

Student Sex Item A Item B Item C Item D Item ES1 F 27 20 22 47 7S2 FS3 F 24 24 20 48 0S4 F 23 19 20 42 4S5 M 30 27 30 57 3S6 F 23 23 22 46 0S7 F 22 23 29 45 -1S8 F 28 19 22 47 9S9 F 20 18 25 38 2S10 M 30 26 28 56 4S11 MS12 M 30 22 21 52 8S13 FS14 MS15 FS16 M 31 17 20 48 14S17 M 34 15 26 49 19S18 F 27 25 26 52 2S19 F 36 24 29 60 12S20 F 34 22 25 56 12S21 M 28 31 25 59 -3S22 M 28 25 27 53 3S23 F 25 26 27 51 -1S24 MS25 M 27 18 17 45 9S26 F 34 21 21 55 13S27 M 25 24 23 49 1

AVERAGE 28 22 24 50 6MEDIAN 28 23 25 49 4RANGE 20—36 15—31 17—30 38—60 (-3)—19SPREAD -16 -16 -13 -22 -22

Appendix C: Student Responses to Formative Assessment: “Framing and Inquiry Question”

28

Appendix D: Unit Plan

29

Industrial Revolution Unit Pacing Guide SS.11.3.8 Describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial revolution

Target: Describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial revolution, making significant connections, insights, and generalizations

Date

Focus Skill(Daily Lesson Objectives)

Lessons/Instructional Materials Do Now /Embedding(Warm-ups)

Formative Assessment (Quiz, Exit

Slip, DSI, CR, Project)

Homework

M 3/19

-Introduce new way of learning: Philosophy-Begin building community, using Community Ball activity

Day 1: Make a Community BallQ: What does “Philosophy” mean to you?-Discuss typical school learning, how we're going to try something different. Remind students that not all the answers are in the textbook, some are inside of themselves.-In order to do so, discuss need for “intellectually safe environment.” -Arrange tables in a circle-Begin Community Ball activity. Q: “What is something you're good at, and why?”

Warm-up #1: What was your favorite thing you learned last quarter, in any of your classes?

Notes on class discussion

Bring Composition Book (This will be your class journal. If you still have it, you may use the Justice Journal you made last semester.)

W 3/21

-Continue building community; students will become more comfortable with speaking and listening to each other.-Begin thinking about transitions, theme of change

Day 2: How are we like the Community Ball?-arrange tables in a circle-Complete Community Ball activity, sharing responses from Warm-up #2 (transitions)-Q: How is this community ball like us in this class?

Warm-up #2: List your K-5 teachers' names. Describe your transition from El. To Middle Sch, then from Middle to High School.

Notes on class discussion (from now on in your journal)

1 paragraph in journal: discuss your experience making the Community Ball

F 3/23

-Begin thinking about social change, starting with a familiar and personal subject (making it meaningful)-Introduce Annotations method of reading

Day 3: Introducing Annotations: Hawaii 78-arrange desks in a circle- “Once-around” sharing responses from Warm-up #3.-Handout Hawaii 78 lyrics. Introduce annotations method. Model annotation method on Prometheon Board.-Listen to Hawaii 78 recording and annotate lyrics.-Begin sharing what stood out to you from annotations

Warm-up #3: 1 Par: What does “Hawaii” mean to you?

-Weekly self-evaluation rubric-Notes on class discussion-Hawaii 78 annotations

“Ask Tutu” - 1 Par in journal: Ask an elder about their perspective of the Hawaii 78 lyrics.

M 3/26

Kuhio Day

W 3/28

-Introduce, discuss, unpack language of the Standard-Understand the causes of the Industrial Rev.-Understand why it started in Britain

Day 4: Unpacking the Standard-Review standard, unpacking the language (pink sheet)-Discovery Ed video (16 min) and annotations-P4C: What makes a good question (Introduce toolkit)“One question you have after watching”

Warm-up #4: In Textbook: Scan Ch 19, how is it like Hawaii 78?

Video annotations

5 Toolkit Questions

F 3/30

-Understand how it felt to work in factory setting.-Understand difference between “Cottage system” and Factory life

Day 5: Experiencing the FactoryFactory Experience Simulation

Warm-up #5: Review partner's Q from hmwrk. Potential answer's?

Weekly self-evaluation rubric

Section Summaries

M 4/2

-Build essential vocabulary-Introduce Plain Vanilla activity-Begin thinking about social and economics implications of the industrial revolution

Day 6: Plain Vanilla-Review Vocab Quads-Introduce “Plain Vanilla”-Begin Plain Vanilla on Section 3: Social Effects of the Indust. Rev.

Warm-up #6: Sect 3 Vocab Quads

Annotations, Personal Question

W 4/4

-Understand social and economic implications of Industrial Revolution.-Begin making connections, insights, generalizations.

Day 7: Plain Vanilla Cont'd.Continue Plain Vanilla,If early finish, make Toolkit and Magic Words together as class.

Warm-up #7: Take out annotations, prepare to share

-Notes on class discussion-Weekly self-evaluation rubric

One Thought - closing thoughts from Plain Vanilla session

F 4/6

Good Friday

30

Appendix E: Lesson Plan 1

Course: World History Grade Level(s): 9 Date: Wednesday, 3/28/12

Lesson: Industrial Revolution – “What's My Mountain?” / Unpacking the Standard

Period Times, [Total Instructional Minutes]: Pd. 6 (11:59) 12:05 – 1:21 [76 min]

STAGE ONE – DESIRED RESULTS7

Major Goal(s) (What relevant goals [e.g., content standards, course or program objectives, learning outcomes] will this design address?)SS.11.3.8 Describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial revolutionTarget: Describe the socio-economic impact of the industrial revolution, making significant connections, insights, and generalizations

Objective(s): -Building/repairing community, as a class (Address the conflict from last week, and how we can move forward as an intellectually safe community)-Introduce, discuss, unpack language of the Standard-Discuss what makes a good question (begin use of Good Thinker's Toolkit)

Understandings (Students will understand that… What are the big ideas? What specific understandings about them are desired? What misunderstandings are predictable?)-Understand the causes of the Industrial Revolution-Understand why it started in Britain

Essential Questions (What provocative questions will foster inquiry, understanding, and transfer of learning?)How do you disagree safely? What does intellectual safety look like for us as a community?What makes a good question?

Students will be able to (SWBAT) (What should they eventually be able to do as a result of such knowledge and skill?) Use Bloom's taxonomy action verbs, e.g., “SWBAT identify...”SWBAT Think more critically / deeply about the questions they raise.SWBAT communicate their ideas in an intellectually safe way

STAGE TWO – ASSESSMENT EVIDENCE

Performance Tasks (Through what authentic performance task(s) will students demonstrate the desired understandings? By what criteria will “performances of understanding” be judged?) Students will self-evaluate their participation / listening / depth of thinking with a Thumbs-up/down/middle at end of class, and through Weekly participation rubric on Friday.Students will come up with 5 “toolkit questions” for homework, beginning use of the Good Thinker's Toolkit.

STAGE THREE – LEARNING PLAN

Materials/Equipment/Supplies: (What do I need to teach this lesson? What do the students need to participate?)Good Thinker's toolkit wall displayInquiry JournalSeinfeld Skit videotextbookCommunity Ball

AGENDA (on the board):

Warm-Up #4: Scan Chapter 19 in your textbook. How are the changes you see similar to the changes Iz was singing about in Hawaii 78? ◦ Due today: “Ask Tutu” paragraph

Once-around—Ask Tutu PairShare: “What's My Mountain?” Closure/Self Eval

◦ Hmwrk: 5 Toolkit Questions

7 Lesson plan template (in blue) drawn from “Differentiated Instruction (Understanding by Design)” by Carol Ann Tomlinson & Jay McTighe, and “MET Backward Design Lesson Planning Format” PowerPoint by University of Hawaii at Manoa.

31

Total Class Time: 76 minutes(minutes/minutes remaining)

(10/64) Warm-up #4, attendance, return papers ***NOTE Kids who Still need Journals

(10/54) Addressing Friday's conflict. Explain what happened.

◦ [Student] shared an opinion, she was then jumped on, verbally assaulted and harassed. ◦ This should never happen.◦ I spoke with the students who made the comments, and with their families. Their families were not happy to hear about it.

There will always be disagreement.◦ How many heard about the conflict at Kawa'a Bay? Some of you may have family members involved in that.◦ They had a hearing recently about that issue and even the adults could not express themselves in a civil, respectful, intellectually

safe manner. Rather, there was shouting, fist-pounding, name-calling, and even threats called out on BOTH sides. ◦ Those adults never learned how to communicate their ideas in a safe way.◦ What is the result though, when you shout and threaten someone who you're trying to get your idea across to? Do they listen to you?

Respect your idea? No, they get offended, and close their ears even more. It's ok to disagree. It's GOOD to disagree. Through disagreement, we often reach a better understanding of a topic, learn from each other,

open up a subject more.◦ But this only happens if we disagree in a SAFE way - respecting the other's opinion, even if you disagree. Listening, hearing them

out. As soon as you lose your cool, you've lost the opportunity to affect that person towards some change. Or to persuade them. You've lost their ear.

◦ Recall Iz's words, “Can you just imagine if they came back...” What if the king and queen came back and saw the way we behaved as a class on Friday. Would they have been proud of that? Or saddened? Do you think Iz would have been proud of that?

◦ Do you guys remember how [other Student] shared her opinion? Did she disrespect anyone in the process? Did she call anyone names? Any racial remarks? Attack anyone? But did she sacrifice any passion in the process?

See, we have a big responsibility, as members of this Kona community, to create a better future. And a big part of that is how we communicate to each other, and how we think. In this class, we will be spending the rest of the quarter developing those skills: our communication and thinking. We want to be respectful, and we want to think deeply, not just treat something at face value.

Does anyone have something to share? Can you do it in a SAFE way, respecting those around you? For the rest of us, remember, if you disagree with what this person shared, simply raise your hand and you can share. There is no reason to shout out a complaint. EVERYONE with something to say will get a chance to speak.

Next: I wanted to get started with our next subject, but we need to get to know each other a little better first.

(5/49) Personal Share: Once-around. [***This part was skipped for times sake***]Answer the following question when the ball comes to you, then pass the ball to the next person. It is ok to pass if you have nothing to share. “Who did you ask for the 'Ask Tutu' homework? Why that person?”After Once-Around, ask if anyone wants to share what their person shared.

(29/20) PairShare: What's my mountain? Activity-Answer each of the following. Then take 3 minutes to write down everything that comes to mind about that place.

“What is my mountain?” (hunting on Mauna Kea? Live on Mauna Loa?)“What is my beach?” (Fishing at South Point? Surfing at Banyans?)“What is my valley?” (Hollywood? Death Valley?)“What is my neighborhood?” (Where did you grow up? Where do you hang out?)“Who is my hero? Why?” (Auntie or Uncle? Character on TV?)

-Share with your elbow partner, take notes on what they said.-Introduce your partner to class.

(10/10) Discussion: Unpacking the Standard [***This part was also skipped, and Whats My Mountain activity continued on to the following period***]Show Seinfeld videoDiscussion of the language of the Standard, what makes a good question. (Probably continue to Friday)Use What do you mean? [W] tool to unpack the language of the standard, discussing each word, how it relates with our knowledge so far.Question: What makes a good question?

(10/0)Self Evaluate: How was our listening? Safety? Depth?

Reset classroom. Homework in Planner. Any kids I need to talk to?

32

Appendix F: Lesson Plan 2

Course: World History Grade Level(s): 9 Date: Wednesday, 4/11/12

Lesson: Industrial Revolution – Plain Vanilla

Period Times, [Total Instructional Minutes]: Pd. 6 (11:59) 12:05 – 1:21 [76 min]

Objective(s): Analyze why life changed as industry spread Summarize how an agricultural revolution led to the growth of an industry outline the new technologies that helped trigger the industrial revolution Understand why Britain was the starting point for the Industrial Revolution Describe the changes that transformed the textile industry Explain the significance of the transportation revolution. Introduce new activity: Plain Vanilla

AGENDA (on the board):Due: Assembly Line T-chart and CartoonWarm-up #9.5: Take out annotations. Prepare to share one thing you wondered about from this activity. One thing that stood out to you.Plain Vanilla Hmwrk: Complete annotations, be prepared with one question to discuss as a class.

Total Class Time: 75 minutes

Introduce Plain Vanilla, begin Section 19.3 Annotations ◦ We've discussed the CAUSES, now we're going to get into some of the IMPACTS, or EFFECTS of the Industrial revolution. To do that we're

going to read through Section 3, but we're going to do it in a special way.

◦ “Plain Vanilla” is a fundamental activity we'll be doing together, to really scratch beneath the surface or our thinking. We don't want to just know “the facts.” We want to make it MEANINGFUL. We want to make “Significant connections, insights, and generalizations.” To do that, we're going to study this next “SOURCE” in a different way.

If necessary at any point, start with a quick game of speedball. Introduce the Steps of Plain Vanilla (on Prometheon):

◦ 1. Read something together.

◦ 2. Come up with questions.

◦ 3. Vote on which Q to discuss. Read all questions out loud first. Every one gets two votes. Once winner is selected, take 5 min to write everything you can think of about that one question.

◦ 4. Dialogue/Inquiry about the selected question, using WRAITEC (Letters from Toolkit, and Magic Words, as appropriate) Dialogue begins with the person whose question it was. Try to model use of Toolkit and Magic Words.

◦ 5. Evaluate how we did, using our criteria. Choose maybe 2 or three appropriate questions to ask, solicit feedback. If about to end class, have students write down one question or final thought they have.

Discuss: Why are we doing this?◦ What is school supposed to look like?◦ We've discussed how the answers are not all found inside the textbook, but inside you guys.

First step, Read. We want to read through this together in the same way we've digested our other “SOURCES” this quarter. Underline, circle, ask questions. What stood out to you? What do you wonder about? In the end, have a question ready to continue Plain Vanilla tomorrow.

Wrap-up

◦ Hmwrk: Be prepared to begin Plain Vanilla next class. Complete annotations on Section 3. Come up with one question you have, related to the material (using our criteria for a Philosophical Q)

33

Appendix G: Pre- and Post-Test Class Data

34

Student Sex

S1 F 7.5 63%S2 F 9 75%S3 F 6 50%S4 F 6 9.5 7.5 17 50% 71%S5 M 7.5 63%S6 F 11 12 10 22 92% 92%S7 F 11 9 10 19 92% 79%S8 F 10 83%S9 FS10 M 9 10 12 22 75% 92%S11 M 6 50%S12 M 12 100%S13 F 6 50%S14 M 6 50%S15 F 6 9 8 17 50% 71%S16 M 6 50%S17 M 6 50%S18 F 10 10 10 20 83% 83%S19 F 9 10 11 21 75% 88%S20 F 9 75%S21 M 9.5 79%S22 M 9.5 12 12 24 79% 100%S23 F 11 12 10 22 92% 92%S24 M 6 50%S25 M 7.5 63%S26 F 6 9 8 17 50% 71%S27 M

AVERAGE (Class wide)* 8.10 10.25 9.85 20.10 68% 84%

Item A Content

(Pre)

Item B Content (Post)

Item C Vocab Use (Post only)

Item D Total Score (Post only)

Item E Pre-test

%

Item F Post-test

%

Blank scores indicate no assessment was received from that student.

Item A: Pre-Test Content score (Used the same scoring ratio [12-10-9-6] as the Post-test.)Item B: Post-Test Content scoreItem C: Post-Test “Understanding and use of vocabulary” scoreItem D: Post-Test Total Score (added Items B & C)Item E: Pre-Test Percentage (Item A / 12)Item F: Post-Test Percentage (Item D / 24)

*Class wide averages are artificially high, as they do not include 0s for not handing in.

Appendix H: Pre- and Post-Test Student Response - Emmie

35

Appendix I: Pre-Test Student Response – Enrique (did not turn in a Post-Test)

36

Appendix J: My classroom management 'cheat sheet':

◦ Be prepared.

▪ Am I CLEAR on what I expect? Have I done sufficient prep, really thought through my specific EXPECTATIONS and products (evidence) requested of the students?

◦ Be clear.

▪ Are they CLEAR on what to do? If I walked in this room would I know what to do? If I had just heard those instructions you gave would I know exactly how to spend the next 10 minutes?

▪ Setting up the classroom—Stopping and pausing. “We're actually going to have a discussion. What do you need for that discussion?” Your journal, pen, G-T-Toolkit/Magic Words. MBWA to check for compliance. Take the time to start them off right.

◦ Be proactive (preventative, e.g., seating charts).

▪ Catch the seating at the beginning of class. Start them off right. Always.

◦ Be firm.

▪ Don't back down, ever.

▪ I believe in—want to—maintain a learning environment. I CARE about your education that much. It's not about being an authoritarian, but being CLEAR on expectations—HIGH expectations. Fooling around is not acceptable.

▪ Use Molly's line: “I'm going to take away your phone, etc., because I think you'll respect me for being consistent.”

◦ Be consistent.

▪ Follow through to the end, referral, parent communication, whatever is necessary.

▪ I need to do these things, and do them consistently. Don't forget – have these notes with you if necessary. Recite them each day before school, whatever, just get them in your head.

▪ Tardiness – have attendance folder with you at the door, ready to mark kids late as they come in. No questions asked, no excuses needed. They know the rules. We don't debate the rules, simply enforce them.

◦ Be aware.

▪ Tune in to what's going on. Anticipate. Be ready to pounce on it. (situational awareness). If you miss something, then you're not being consistent, and you appear aloof.

▪ If they're allowed to do as they will, class will get progressively worse. Can't have that. It's supposed to get progressively better. It starts now.

37

References

Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New

York: David McKay Co Inc.

Jackson, T. (1989). A Guide For Teachers. Accessed May 9, 2012, from www.p4chawaii.org/wp-

content/uploads/2011/06/TeachGuide.pdf

Jackson, T. (2001). The art and craft of “Gently Socratic” inquiry. In A. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds:

A resource book for teaching thinking (3rd ed.) (pp. 459-465). Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Jackson, T., & Butnor, A. L. (n.d.). The Start-up Kit Lessons for Young Beginners 3rd Edition. Accessed

May 9, 2012, from www.p4chawaii.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/StartUp-Kit-3.pdf

Konawaena High School Status and Improvement Report (School Year 2011-11). (2011). Honolulu, HI:

Hawaii State Department of Education.

Konawaena High Trend Report: Educational and Fiscal Accountability (School Report for School Year

20010-2011). (2011). Honolulu, HI: Hawaii State Department of Education.

38