InTASC Standard One: Learner Development

The teacher understands how learners grow and develop,

recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary
individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social,
emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements
developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

Name of Artifact: Portfolio 5 Child Profile

Date: August 1, 2015
Course: EDUC 121: Child and Adolescent Development
Brief Description:
A summary document, to get an encompassing view of the Physical, Cognitive and
Socioemotional development of a child/adolescent.
Rationale: The teacher understands how learners grow and develop,
recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually, within and
across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs
and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning
experiences.

PORTFOLIO 2
PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT ARTIFACT
Childs age: 12
Childs gender: F
In efforts to assess the physical development of a child, I utilized
methods which appear on physical assessment batteries common to the
United States, and Europe. After assessment of large motor skills, I also took
time to assess small motor skills, as well.
The first assessment was to be a mile long run/walk, but was altered to
a half mile mid-event, due to the environmental factors (lightning) inhibiting
us. The child was to run 8 laps around the soccer field, which totals up to
one mile. She started diligently enough, running one lap with a time of
0:56.74. It was at the second lap, half way through, when she first walked,
for approximately a quarter lap, giving the second lap a time of 1:11.81. The
third lap, she took at a more even pace, and jogged all the way through for a
lap time of 0:57.67. The last lap, seemed to be more effortful on my
subjects part. Her pace was tired, but regular, and she finished with a lap
time of 0:58.41. The culminating laps equal approximately 4.08/half-mile.
The second assessment is known as the broad jump. My subject
started behind a designated line, with feet shoulder width apart. She then
swung her arms back and leapt forward, with both feet, to go as far as
possible. The first time, my subject scored a distance of 43. She seemed

pleased with this, though she expressed that she was eager to try again. Her
second effort scored a 54 jump. Again encouraged, she was quickly ready
to try more jumps. Upon her third jump, also her farthest, at a distance of
59, she exclaimed, smiling, I can jump farther than my own height!
The third assessment is known as the shuttle run. The participant is to be
timed, running 5 meters in length, for a total of 10 times. The ability to stop,
pivot and restart quickly, was demonstrated in my subject. Her first score
was a time of 27 seconds. She was slightly winded, and it was very hot (95
degrees F), so we waited a few minutes to try again. Her second score was
28 seconds, even after a break. She expressed frustration, at becoming
sweaty and winded again so quickly. So we went to get some water, and
break some more. After 10 minutes in the air conditioning, she was ready to
try again. Her last score was her best, at 26 seconds, and she was ready to
be done.
Finally, in an attempt to assess small motor skills, and in thanks for
taking part, I offered the use of Mr. Sketch (smelly) markers, to color some
intricately designed patterns. I found it refreshing to be able to evaluate her
small motor skills, and offer a small reward for her diligent physical efforts.
We colored together, as we talked. I learned her favorite activity was the
broad jump, and that she was surprised to jump so far. I notice that she is
very particular, and takes her time to position the marker in a way to suit the
depth of coverage. She was in control of where color was placed, and did not
color outside the lines. In fact her coloring had less error, than mine!

In all areas assessed, it seemed my subject was competent, and was more
skilled in some areas than in others.

Scoring Table
1 needs improvement
2 adequate
3 above adequate

Half-Mile Run
Lap times were consistently near the one minute marker, with a lag
where she walked. Her running speed could improve with training,
but she is competent.
Ran whole time-1
Pacing-2

Broad Jump
This activity was most enjoyable for my subject. She was pleased to
jump progressively farther, each try.
Feet behind line-3
Jump landing (stays on feet)-3

Shuttle Run
This activity seems to be done on different days, or inside, as my
subject was reluctant to continue in the weather.

Over-run-2
Pivot at line-2

Effortful Coloring
My subject was in control of her small motor skills quite well.
Stays in the lines-3

InTASC Standard Six: Assessment

The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to
engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress,
and to guide the teachers and learners decision making.

Name of Artifact: Physical Development/Portfolio 2

Date: July 5, 2015
Course: EDUC 121: Child and Adolescent Development
Brief Description:
An observation, and assessment, specifically in the physical domain, of a
child\adolescent.
Rationale:
The teacher must know, and utilize multiple and varying methodology to assess,
and engage the growth of learners, as well as to monitor progress. This will then
guide further decision making, to allow the best education possible for learners.

Portfolio 3

Cognitive Development Artifact

In the interest of assessing the cognitive development of my12 year old female subject,
several methodologies were employed.
Cognitive development according to Piagets Four Stages of Cognitive Development, was
first evaluated. In evaluation of deductive reasoning, my subject was asked to read, and evaluate
the two facts, (Kail 168) and was then asked to respond with the appropriate probable outcome.
1. If a feather hits a piece of glass, the glass breaks.
2. Mary hits a piece of glass with the feather.
When asked the probable conclusion of this situation, my subject responded
What?!...The glass will not break! Because she chose a counter-factual answer to the series,
her choice is indicative that she has past the concrete operational stage, and is at the formal
operational stage of Piagets Cognitive Development.
In the evaluation of my subjects reading fluency, she was asked to read a paragraph
aloud. I was able to note that her reading was emotive, because as she read, she was able to use
tone and pitch to give meaning to some sentences. For instance, the line you wouldnt care
anyway had a lower tone than the previous sentence, implying doubt.
Further evaluation was taken in reading comprehension. My subject was asked to read a
7th grade reading comprehension quiz about The Panama Canal. She was then asked to respond
to multiple choice questions to determine what information she understood. My subject scored 5
out of 7 possible on the questions, answering 71% correctly. Since she is not yet in 7th grade, I
think this is an affirmation that her reading comprehension is satisfactory.
My subject and I then spent approximately a half hour taking an online I.Q. test. Though
I am not confident in the resulting score of the test, I was able to personally experience

Vygotskys Zone of Proximal Development. Without giving my subject answers, I was able to
frame some questions she did not comprehend, in a way that she was able to find success. In the
end, my subjects I.Q. was scored in the normal range, though I am not convinced of the efficacy
of the test, itself.
Finally, I had a frank conversation about academic skill with my subject, and was also
able to view her last report card. We discussed her strengths, reading, and her weaknesses,
testing. She was very proud of her academic achievements, and expressed displeasure upon
being asked if there were times when she did not understand an assignment? She replied Uggh,
I hate it when I dont get it! Explaining that then she asks for more help.
Specifically, I learned that the development of my subject is more advanced in some
areas than in others. I was also able to make connections to some cognitive development ideas,
like Vygotskys Zone of Proximal Development.

InTASC Standard Three: Learning Environments

The teacher works with others to create environments that support
individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive
social interaction, active engagement in learning, and selfmotivation.

Name of Artifact: Portfolio 3 Cognitive Development

Date: July 19, 2015
Course: EDUC 121: Child and Adolescent Development
Brief Description:
An observation and assessment of child/adolescent, distinctively of the cognitive
development.
Rationale:
The teacher must comprehend how learners grow and develop, and recognize both
patterns of learning and development, and the variances across the cognitive,
linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, to design and implement
challenging learning experiences.

Portfolio 4
Socioemotional Development

In order to evaluate the moral reasoning of a child/adolescent, I employed Kohlbergs

Moral Dilemma. As a factor contributing to prosocial behavior, the skill Moral Reasoning is
helpful, because children are more likely to help others. The Story of Heinz, below, was read out
aloud to the subject, a 12 year old, Female, who was asked to respond to questions about the
story.
In Europe, a woman was near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of
radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The druggist was
charging $2,000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick womans
husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get
together about half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and
asked him to sell it cheaper or let him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the
druggist said, No. The husband got desperate and broke into the mans store to
steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that? Why?
Next, I dictated the following questions regarding the dilemma to my subject, allowing
time to respond, and to record her respective responses individually.
1. Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not?
2. If Heinz doesn't love his wife, should he steal the drug for her? Why or why
not?
3. Suppose the person dying is not his wife but a stranger. Should Heinz steal the
drug for a stranger? Why or why not?
In regard to the first question, my subject responded Yes, to save his wife. At first for
question two, she said Not if he doesnt love her, but her voice trailing. After a moment of
thought, she stated that Well he should still steal the drug for her; but why is he even married if
he doesnt love her? To question three, she paused a moment, and then said He still should do
it cause theyre both people. When asked to whom she was referring, she clarified the wife and
stranger. I mean hes going to get in trouble, but do it anyway.
In review of the answers my subject gave, she displays traits of Kohlbergs
Postconventional Level, at the sixth stage, due to the fact that she determines her values and

morality from her own abstract principles. I find this especially so because of her reasoning that
theyre both people when asked about the stranger in question three. As a factor contributing
to prosocial behavior, the skill Moral Reasoning is helpful, and was evaluated in my subject at
the highest level. I had expected her to not reason for a stranger, and was surprised by her
generous moral nature.

InTASC Standard Three: Learning Environments

The teacher works with others to create environments that support

individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive

social interaction, active engagement in learning, and selfmotivation.

Name of Artifact: Portfolio 4 Socioemotional Development

Date: July 26, 2015
Course: EDUC 121: Child and Adolescent Development
Brief Description:
An assessment of socioemotional development of a child/adolescent was done
using Kohlbergs Dilemma, as a prompt for questions.
Rationale:
The teacher works to create environments that support individual and collaborative
learning, and that encourage positive social interactions, in order to achieve
engagement in classroom learning and improve self-motivation.