Evidence of Student Learning/Planning Cycle

Artifact Rationale

1) Briefly describe the artifact and identify the CEC standards connected to the artifact.
The Evidence of Student Learning/Planning Cycle artifact required me to plan, teach,
analyze, and reflect upon a three-day lesson taught in a 4th grade English/Language Arts class at
Carroll Manor Elementary School. The CEC standards connected to this artifact were Standard
3, which addresses Curricular Content Knowledge, and Standard 4, which addresses Assessment.
2) Describe the knowledge and skills you mastered while completing the artifact. Relate your
statements to the specific standards aligned with the artifact.
My knowledge and skills in curricular content knowledge, CEC 3, were mastered while
completing this artifact. I was able to use the central concepts, learning tools, and structure of the
English/Language Arts curriculum in order to create a positive learning experience throughout
the three-day lesson. Furthermore, I was able to take the curriculum and make learning
accessible to all students in an authentic and meaningful way. I was able to connect key concepts
to real life experiences in order to engage all learners while fostering their thinking, creativity,
and collaboration.
My knowledge and skills in assessment, CEC 4, were also mastered while completing
this artifact. I used my knowledge of the assessment process to create a pre assessment,
formative assessments, and summative assessments that allowed students to show their mastery
and learning in multiple ways. I allowed students to engage in their own growth and monitor

their own progress. I also used my knowledge and skills in assessment to guide, modify, and
reflect upon my own teaching as well as make instructional decisions within the lesson.
3) Describe the ways in which your students were or will be positively affected by your mastery
of the standards reflected by this artifact.
The students who received instruction during the three-day lesson were positively
affected by my mastery of the standards reflected by this artifact. I feel as though I was able to
make an impression on the students I had the pleasure of working with and teaching. I was able
to build confidence and add excitement to learning. I used technology and UDL principles in
order to engage and make learning accessible to all. Furthermore, I feel as though my mastery of
the standards reflected by this artifact will also have a positive impact on my future students. I
was able to gain much insight about the planning cycle process and a plethora of ideas to
incorporate into future lessons in order to continually develop my teaching skills.

Learning Context, Topic, and Objectives

Carroll Manor Elementary is located in Baldwin, Maryland and is in the central
administrative area of Baltimore County. The school primarily services students from semiprofessional and professional residents, typically in single-family homes. Carroll Manor
currently educates 338 children and has a capacity of 362 children. It is a fairly small school with
21 total classrooms and only 24 classroom teachers. Of the teachers, there is one full-time
Special Educator and one-part time Special Educator. The school population is made up of 87%
Caucasian students, 4% African American, 4% Hispanic, 4% two or more races, and 2% of
students are Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander.
Carroll Manor Elementary holds each and every student to rigorous levels of academic
performance and achievement. The school features a full inclusion model for special
education, where students with IEPs and 504 plans are fully integrated into the classroom
environment with their peers. Carroll Manors learning environment is very rich and nurturing.
Each teacher has created a classroom that fosters positivity and motivates all students. These
students are held to the highest academic standards in order to reach their full learning potential.
Students at Carroll Manner are very kind to one another, eager to achieve, and take pride in their
learning.
The class used for my Evidence of Student Learning was a 4th grade English/Language
Arts class, in which I taught both large and small group instruction. The class is made up of a
total of 17 students. Of the 17 students, 9 are female and 8 are male. Three students have
IEPs, one student has a 504 Plan, and 7 students are identified as being part of Gifted and
Talented. Of the students with IEPs, two are identified as having learning disabilities and one is

identified as having Autism and receives speech services. However, this student does not display
a noticeable difference in oral language. None of the other students in the class have significant
oral or written language delays nor does this class have any cultural or linguistic differences.
All objectives for this unit came from the Maryland College and Career Readiness
Standards (MCCRS). The standards for Lesson 1 aligned with MCCRS RI 4.6 and L 4.4a.
Standard RI 4.6 states: compare and contrast first-hand and second-hand account of the same
event or topic; describe the difference in focus and the information provided. Standard L 4.4a
states: use context (e.g. definitions, examples, or restatements in text) as a clue to the meaning of
a word or phrase. The standards for Lesson 2 align with MCCRS RI 4.1 and L 4.4a. Standard
RI 4.1 states: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly
and when drawing inferences from the text. As stated above, standard L 4.4a states: use context
(e.g. definitions, examples, or restatements in text) as a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase.
The standards for Lesson 3 align with MCCRS RI 4.1, RI 4.2, and W 4.2. As described above,
RI 4.1 states: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly
and when drawing inferences from the text. Standard RI 4.2 states: determine the main idea of a
text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text. Standard W 4.2 states:
write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly.
Objective 1, relating to RI 4.6 and L 4.4a, is: The students will be able to demonstrate
their understanding of the differences and similarities between biographies and autobiographies
by completing a venn diagram. The Essential Question of this lesson is EQ6: How does
comparing and contrasting a first-hand and second-hand account of the same event or topic
demonstrate comprehension of informational texts. Objective 2, relating to RI 4.1 and L 4.4a, is:
The students will be able to refer to details and examples in a text in order to draw inferences

about the text by completing the FQR chart. The students will demonstrate their understanding
by completing a journal prompt by identifying how journeys shape a persons identity. The
Essential Questions of this lesson are EQ1, EQ2, and EQ3. EQ1 asks: What makes a person
memorable? EQ2 asks: How doe journeys shape a persons identity? EQ3 asks: How does
referring to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when
drawing inferences from the text demonstrate comprehension of text? Objective 3, relating to RI
4.1, RI 4.2, and W 4.2 is: The students will be able to refer to details and examples in a text in
order to explain how the main idea of a text is supported by key details. The students will
demonstrate their knowledge by completing a journal prompt. Essential Questions of this lesson
are EQ1, EQ2, EQ3, EQ4, and EQ5. EQ 1, 2, and 3 are identified above. EQ 4 asks: How does
determining the main idea of a text and explaining how it is supported by key details demonstrate
comprehension of informational text? EQ 5 asks: How does summarizing the text demonstrate
comprehension of informational text?
In order for students to achieve the standards set forth above, it is important for students
to be aware and well versed in the over-arching theme or broad based question that is being
addressed in the lesson. Each objective was written by taking all students into consideration
whether they have IEPs, 504 plans, are GT, or are achieving on grade level. Of the three
students with IEPs, all three students have writing goals and only two of the students have
reading goals. It was important to keep these students and their goals in mind due to the fact
these lessons rely heavily on reading and writing skills.

Assessment Plan
In order to evaluate whether or not students have obtained a firm grasp of the skills
needed to meet the objectives aligned with the MCCRS, I have used a plethora of assessments.
Summative assessments were needed to assess the overall understanding of students in relation
to what was taught during the three-day lesson. I used multiple summative assessments due to
the fact that Lesson 1 and Lesson 2 built upon the same skills and Lesson 3 was directed towards
a new skill as per the Baltimore County 4th Grade English/Language Arts Curriculum. The first
summative assessment was supposed to be completed on the second day of teaching, but it ended
up being completed during Lesson 3 due to an unexpected fire drill. The first summative
assessment was a journal entry in their Reading Journals relating to the text The Tarantula in My
Purse by Jean Craighead George. The journal prompt stated, Explain why Craighead Georges
family chooses to live their lives on a journey with animals. Use the details and inferences on the
FQR chart and The Genesis to support your answer. Students were instructed to write a 5 at
the top of their journal entries in order to remind them that their response needed to be 5
sentences. The first sentence should be a topic sentence, then three supportive details, followed
by a concluding sentence. Students were instructed to use their text and FQR charts to cite
specific details and use text evidence. The second summative assessment was also a journal entry
in students Reading Journals relating to the same text. The journal prompt stated, Explain how
Craighead George decides to let Yammer go. Use text evidence and your graphic organizer to
add key details that support the main idea. Students were also instructed to write a 5 at the top
of their entries as stated above. Students were instructed to use their graphic organizer and text in
order to add key details to support the main idea. Summative assessment 1 is related to drawing
inferences, and summative assessment 2 adds the concept of identifying the main idea of a text.

In order to identify students prior knowledge and learning needs, a pre assessment
was administered. Lessons 1, 2, and 3 build upon students knowledge of the difference between
autobiographies and biographies as well as identifying first and second-hand accounts. The
students would be reading different first and second-hand accounts from this point forward as per
the curriculum. The pre assessment I used was a venn diagram from the curriculum. On the
left side of the diagram, it was labeled Autobiograhpies: First-Hand Accounts and the right
side was labeled Biographies: Second-Hand Accounts. I explained to all students that the
middle section of the diagram was for anything biographies and autobiographies have in
common. I asked students what they already knew about biographies and autobiographies. I
informed students to write down all of their thoughts on the venn diagram by using a pencil. I set
the timer for three minutes. I then instructed students to work with a partner or small group at
their tables in order to add to their diagram of characteristics. I instructed students to use red ink
for this portion. I once again set the timer for three minutes. Once discussion between small
groups or partners was complete, I had several students share their organizers on the document
camera. I finally informed students of several characteristics that were important to note on their
venn diagram. I copied these characteristics on my own venn diagram on the document camera. I
instructed students to copy any new ideas in a different colored pen or pencil. The idea behind
the different colored writing instruments was for it to be easy for me to differentiate which ideas
students came up with on their own, which came from discussion with partners or small group,
and which characteristics were teacher given.
In order for students to demonstrate their understanding of each daily lesson
objective, it is imperative to use a variety of formative assessments, whether they are formal or
informal. For Lesson 1, the formative assessments were the completed venn diagram, whole

group discussions, partner sharing, as well as small group discussion. I decided to use the
completed venn diagram as a formative assessment as well as a pre assessment because students
were instructed to add to their venn diagrams throughout the lesson and it was easy for me to
differentiate between what was come up with by the student and what was teacher given
throughout the lesson. It was easy for me to tell which students had grasped taught concepts and
which ones had not, especially since I was paying particular attention to the different discussions.
The formative assessments for Lesson 2 were the Inference Practice: Where Am I, FQR
chart, and small group discussions. The Inference Practice: Where Am I? was a warm-up
worksheet in which students read a short passage and identify where the student believes the
passage is happening. This was used to evaluate students skills relating to inferences. The FQR
chart was a resource chart in the curriculum where students took the identified chapter, identified
key events from the text, asked a question about that key event, and then wrote down their
reflection or inference made. I made adaptations to the FQR chart by adding boxes and page
numbers for students to look in order fill out 4 different events on the chart. I used small group
discussions as formative assessments because students read aloud the chapter, had teacher
facilitated discussions, and also filled out part of the FQR chart as a group. I felt this was a
necessary step in taking note of students understanding. The formative assessments used for
Lesson 3 were the Milton Hershey Biography key details/main idea chart, Whats the Big
Idea? resource sheet, and small group or large group discussions. The Milton Hershey
Biography key details/main idea chart had sections for key details for Man of the People and
Final Years of Hersheys biography. Then students would need to identify the main idea of the
two text sections. The chart allowed for me to model how to identify key details in the first part
of Milton Hersheys biography and also assess as students determined the main idea of the

second part of the biography. I then allowed students to determine the main idea of the text on
their own or as a small group. I paid attention to small group discussion as part of this formative
assessment. The Whats the Big Idea? chart, was a resource sheet from the curriculum where
students would take each chapter, identify key details in the chapter, and then would determine
the main idea. For Lesson 3, only chapters 1 and 2 were read. The chart allowed for me to let
students fill out chapter 1 key details and main idea as a small group and then would be able to
complete chapter 2 on their own. This allowed me to follow the students thought process
through the discussions and determine which students had grasped the concepts of key details
supporting the main idea.
All assessments used in these lessons are directly aligned with goals, objectives, and
the MCCRS. Objectives for all three lessons were featured on all assessments. I wanted students
to see how first vs. second-hand accounts, determining the main idea, and making inferences are
all reoccurring skills or themes within the MCCRS. Students need to firmly grasp these skills or
themes in order to build upon them in future lessons. The assessments used in these lessons use
many principles of UDL. I integrated technology into my instruction with the use of Prezi. I
allowed students to complete certain assessments as partners or small groups. This allowed for
students to share ideas and learn from one another. I used a mixture of large and small group
instruction, which allowed for me to hear from some students who choose not to share during
large group instruction. I also made specific adaptations to worksheets and charts which made
them easier to fill out and understand. I tried to make learning accessible to all students
throughout my three-day lesson plan. I also did not judge students understanding based solely
upon their written coursework, but fully incorporated their thoughts via discussion into
consideration of whether concepts were grasped or not.

In order to collect data, I used teacher made rubrics to grade the pre assessment and
formative assessments, including all worksheets and charts from the curriculum. In order to
grade journal entries, I used a Constructed Response BCPS Rubric found in the curriculum. I
also used classroom observations, which included small and large group discussions to collect
useful data about students.
For the pre assessment, all students had a general idea of the similarities and differences
between autobiographies and biographies. I graded the pre assessments on a 3-2-1-0 scale, where
students earned a 3 by appropriately and accurately writing well developed responses, a 2 by
writing mostly accurate responses, a 1 by writing minimally accurate responses, and a 0 by
writing inaccurate responses. For my ESL, I am focusing on Students A, B, C, and D, which
were all a part of my small group instruction. All students received a score of 2 on their pre
assessments. For the completed venn diagram formative assessment, after small and large group
discussions, all students received a score of 3.
Formative assessment data for Lesson 2 includes Inference Practice: Where Am I?
Student A received a score of 3, Student B received a score of 3, Student C received a score of 2,
and Student D received a score of 2. The other formative assessment was the FQR chart, where
student A received a score of 2, Student B received a score of 2, Student C received a score of 3,
and Student D received a score of 3. Formative assessment data for Lesson 3 includes the
Milton Hershey Biography key details/main idea chart, Student A received a score of 3,
Student B received a score of 3, Student C received a score of 2, and Student D received a score
of 1. The other data collected was from the Whats the Big Idea? chart. Student A received a
score of 2, Student B received a score of 2, Student C received a score of 3, and Student D
received a score of 2.

The summative assessments, or two journal entries, were scored based upon the
Constructed Response rubric in the BCPS Curriculum. The first journal entry related to the
objective of making inferences. For this journal prompt, Student A received a score of 1, Student
B received a score of 2, Student C received a score of 1, and Student D received a score of 1. The
second journal entry related to the objective of key details supporting the main idea. For this
journal prompt, Student A received a score of 2, Student B received a score of 2, Student C
received a score of 1, and student D received a score of 1.