Advanced proficiency level: 1st Grade Math

N/A

Support materials:
Post-Observation Conversation with Evaluator (Excerpt)
Tracking Sheet

Overall rating & analysis

Overall rating: One AP+ Strand and two E Strands equal an overall AP rating.

Beginning

Advanced

Exemplary

Strand 1: The frequency with which the teacher assesses students’ progress.

Periodically administers diagnostic and summative assessments to determine student performance

Regularly administers diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments to determine student progress

Administers assessments as often as necessary for students to work to mastery

Strand 2: Accuracy and efficiency in grading and the students’ understanding of their own performance.

Grades accurately and efficiently so that students are aware of their performance

Accurately and efficiently grades in a way that helps students understand their performance and where they are in relation to the big goal

Accurately and efficiently grades in ways that help individual students learn their strengths and weaknesses, improve their performance and see where they are in relation to the big goal

Strand 3: The frequency with which the teacher tracks student performance.

Tracks student performance periodically

Tracks student performance regularly so that data can inform short- and long-term planning and differentiation

Tracks student performance immediately so that data can drive short- and long-term planning and differentiation

 

Analysis: Why did the teacher receive these ratings?

Rating: E Strand 1: The frequency with which the teacher assesses students’ progress.

Why E?

The teacher "administers assessments as often as necessary for students to work toward mastery." In a conversation with the evaluator, the teacher explains that he diagnosed all students at the beginning of the year. Further, the teacher formatively assesses students frequently by assigning math problems throughout the week that are well aligned with the objectives for the unit and reviewing this work each day. Students revise their formative assessments until they reach mastery of the concept (i.e., "Over the course of a week, students are working on problems that require this skill at math centers, with parThers, as a whole class, etc. As I review their work over the course of the week, if they get a problem wrong I simply circle it, hand the paper back to them, and they keep working on the problem until they get it right."). In addition, each week they are able to take summative assessments on any objectives on which they have displayed mastery (i.e., "Once a student starts to demonstrate consistent mastery of adding with regrouping during daily independent practice, I will assess that skill in my weekly assessment time.").

Rating: AP Strand 2: Accuracy and efficiency in grading and the students’ understanding of their own performance.

Why AP?

The teacher gives students immediate feedback on their performance throughout the week and grades students’ one-on-one assessments on-the spot, telling students what they got wrong and guiding students to fill out their own tracking sheets that illustrate progress toward the big goal. Therefore, the teacher grades "efficiently in a way that helps students understand their performance and where they are in relation to the big goal."

Why not E?

Although the teacher asks students to "self-assess," there is insufficient evidence that the students’ self-assessments explicitly delineate their "strengths and weaknesses" in ways that help them "improve their performance."

Rating: EStrand 3: The frequency with which the teacher tracks student performance.

Why E?

The teacher "tracks student performance immediately," by grading students on-the-spot during formative and summative assessments and entering his grades into the tracking system on the computer (i.e., "I also enter the students’ grades immediately into my tracking system on my computer. In the left hand column, I have my students’ names, and along the top I have each of the objectives for the year. Each time my students master an objective, I change the 0 to 100 in that box.").

The teacher’s tracking is sufficiently frequent so he can use student data to "drive short- and long-term planning and differentiation." He reports that he is able to use his tracking system to determine groupings and assignments for students every week to ensure that he is planning purposefully and differentiating to meet each student's needs. He is also able to use his frequent tracking to adjust his long-term plan (i.e., "I can look down my tracking system for each objective and I get so much great information for planning purposefully. For example, if only a few students aren't mastering an objective, I know that I need to give them extra practice on that objective during independent practice, guided practice, or centers. I use this data to plan the assignments and groupings for my students every week-I'm always making adjustments. If most of my students miss an objective, I know that I need to shift my long-term planning to re-teach the material. I also get great feedback about which of my lessons are effective, and which aren't. This really helps me guide my own professional development and continuous improvement.").