Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
List the
names of
3
students
you focus
on in the
analysis
M.
Conclusions about
learning
Evidence from
assessment
M appeared more
interested in the two
sides of the conflict
than the chronological
order of events. A
week later she was not
able to come up with
the names of the
countries on either
side on her own but
when given the name
of a country, say
Serbia, she could
determine which side
it fought for.
Evidence
from written
feedback (if any)
According to
Mrs. Majors
observation
notes, M.
Participated a
total of 10 times
during the
discussions in
class. Her
participation
increased as the
lesson went on
and she became
more engaged in
the topic. This
increased
interest
coincided with
my switching her
seats with F.
[3:50]
If I were to work
with M again, I
would put more
effort into
engaging her in
the conversation
early in the
lesson. I feel that
seating her to my
right in that room
setup led to me
overlooking her
for the first part
of the lesson. It
was only when I
switched her to
my left side that I
was able to keep
an eye on her and
pull her into the
wider discussion.
events.
S.
Based on her
participation in class
and the connections
she was able to make
during the discussion, I
feel that S has fully
comprehended the
events of WWI and is
ready to take a more in
depth look into the
events. She is still very
dependent on the
chronological order of
the events. Also, she
keeps referring to
Ferdinand as the
Grand duke which may
be a problem in a
written test. However,
through observing her
during discussions, she
seems completely
aware of who he is and
his role in history as
the Heir to the throne
of Austria-Hungary.
With regard to the
lesson objectives, I
think S has fulfilled all
three of the goals and
has a solid foundation
upon which further
knowledge can be
built.
F.
Based on his
participation in class
and the discussion he
took part in, it seems
Mrs. Majors
notes- S
participated the
most during the
lesson, a total of
16 times. Most
of her
participation
came during the
teacher directed
discussion
around the map
S was also the
and the
student who gave
textbook.
the most detailed
answer on her
exit slip.[see
image]
I noticed that Ss
enthusiasm led to
me calling on her
more than the
other students. If
I were to work
with her again I
would probably
pair her with a
student who was
more prone to
distraction (for
example, F) since
I feel that she
would keep them
on track.
The following
week, during the
literacy lesson,
she was able to
recall the main
events of the war
and offered an
almost complete
recap of the
lesson.
Fs response on
the exit slip was
the most minimal
of all the
By reviewing the
tape and looking
at my Penn
mentors
I would give F
something to do
during the lesson
to keep him on
students. He did
expand on his
answer and the
information he
cited as most
interesting, the
assassination of
the Archduke,
was information
he had
volunteered
during the lesson.
[2:50]
He did make a
considerable
number of
personal
connections to
make, as well as
connections to
current events.
(comparing the
sinking of the
Lusitania to the
crash of flight
MH17 US
involved once it
was confirmed
there were
Americans onboard)
observation
notes, F was the
most disruptive
student in the
group. He also
participated less
during
discussion with
relevant
information.
(total of 10
times) He did
make a
considerable
number of
personal
connections to
make, as well as
connections to
current events.
(comparing the
sinking of the
Lusitania to the
crash of flight
MH17 US
involved once it
was confirmed
there were
Americans onboard)
task. Perhaps he
could be the note
taker of the class,
making it his
responsibility to
keep track of
everybodys
comments and
the main ideas of
the discussion. I
would also take
care to seat him
away from M,
since they seem
to feed off of
each others
energy.