Validated PracticeProject:

Edgewood High School

Nicole WillisSCED 462

Spring 2014

Table of Contents

Title Page………………………………………………………………………………….…………… 1

Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………… 2

Narrative………………………………………………………………………………..……………… 3-11

Summary of Student Reading Scores ………..……………………………….……………..12

Summary of Classroom Profile…………….……………………….…………………………..13

Alignment Table………………………………………………………..…………………………….14

Pre-Assessment………………………………………………………………………………………15

Pre-Assessment Student Artifacts……….………………………………………………..….16-19

Lesson Plan- Mitosis ………………………………………………………………………………20

Lesson Plan Materials……………………………………………………………………………..21-25

Lesson Plan- Asexual Reproduction ……..…………………………………………………26

Lesson Plan Materials……………………………………………………………………………..27-31

Post-Assessment…………………………………………………………………………………….32

Post-Assessment Student Artifacts ………………………………………………………….32-35

Summary of Pre and Post Assessment Student Scores ………….………..…………36

Introduction

This validated practices project was conduced at Edgewood High School- located in

Harford County, Maryland. To describe Edgewood High in one phrase: a school full of diversity

and opportunity. This high school is one of the most diverse in the county- with 45% African

American, 38% Caucasian, 8% Latino, and 4% Asian. Not only is this community diverse in

ethnicity, but also in socioeconomic status, educational abilities, and overall background. With

students in need of co-taught classrooms to students who need more challenge, even up to the IB

(international baccalaureate) level. The wide range of student ability and skill led to a bountiful

resource of clubs and opportunities for students to discover their talent. For example, there is a

preschool held at the high school for students who are interested in pursuing child development

and education. There is an Academy of Finance for those interested in business- and the school

even has their own running bank! Overall, this high school is a diverse community in every

possible way: background, ability, interest, talent, and so much more.

As a teacher, it is critical to know your students and WHO is in your classroom.

Therefore, included is a classroom profile, which summarizes the tenth grade biology class that I

chose to implement this project in (page ). This class has multitude of ethnicities and different

backgrounds- African American, Asian, Hispanic, Caucasian, FARM, and students with

disabilities. Out of the 21 students in the class, 9 are students with disabilities- ranging from

ADHD to bipolar disorder. Along with the diverse backgrounds, students of course have a wide

range of interests. From a student interest survey conducted at the beginning of the semester, I

found that most of my students are interested in music and basketball and a few that are more

introverted and into activities such as video games and reading.

Lastly, as a teacher it is essential to know the diversity of learning and reading ability of

students in the classroom. This can be found my conducting surveys or looking at student’s

educational backgrounds. In order to find out how my students learn best- the student interest

survey asked “what is the best way you learn” and gave students options such as: taking notes,

moving around, discussion, reading, large group, small group, or drawing. Most students

responded with moving around and discussion or group work. To get a sense of reading ability of

my classroom, a summary of reading scores is included (page ). This data gives raw MSA scores,

which do not give a sense of reading level because the scores are so scattered (some students took

normal MSA while some took the mod-MSA). Therefore these raw scores are then converted into

reading level (basic, proficient, advanced). In this classroom there are 55% basic readers, 40%

proficient readers, and 5% advanced. This classroom mirrors the schools’ community in that is

diverse in every possible way: ethnicity, background, interest, learning style, and reading ability.

Knowing who is in my classroom is the first step of becoming a good teacher. The second

step is taking this knowledge in order to modify lessons to meet the needs of students in the

classroom. Having such a diverse classroom makes lesson planning that much more interesting. I

was able to scaffold lessons to meet the needs of a variety of readers and learners. As far as

choosing a reading ability I decided to choose a reading at their grade level- but having

modifications to meet the needs of lower-level readers I also tried to incorporate interests and

learning styles into the lesson. For example for a vocabulary review I was able to incorporate

basketball. While learning about asexual reproduction I was able to incorporate various learning

styles- students get to take notes in this lesson, read, move around, and have discussion. Profiling

the classroom was a great way to get started in designing lessons to meet the needs of my

students. More detail of how student needs were addressed in the lesson will be provided later in

Instruction section.

Learning Goals and Objectives

This project was completed in two lessons- due to the fact that this school has block

schedule with extended 90-minute periods. Included is an alignment table which outlines the

objectives, state, standards, national standards and connection to lesson (page ). Following are

explanation of how the learning objectives for each connect to the national and state standards.

Lesson One

Students will compare mitosis and meiosis in order to answer application style

HSA questions about the two processes.

This objective connects with Maryland indicator 3.2.1 in which students explain processes

found in unicellular and multicellular organisms- in this case students are “comparing

difference between” mitosis (used by unicellular organisms) and meiosis (used by

multicellular organisms). This also aligns with national standard HS-LS1-4 in which

students illustrate the role of cell division (mitosis). This aligns with learning objective

because students will illustrate role of mitosis by setting the scene and comparing this

process to the previously learned process- meiosis. The second part of the objective aligns

with national standards HS-LS3-1 in which students can clarify relationship between

chromosome number in cell division. They will be able to do this by answering HSA style

questions that apply information from these two processes.

Lesson Two

Students will define and observe different types of asexual reproduction in order to

differentiate between the four modes.

This objective connects with the Maryland indicator 3.2.1 in which students explain

processes found in unicellular and multicellular organisms- in this case students are

“defining and observing” different modes of asexual reproduction found in unicellular and

multicellular organisms. This objective also aligns with the national standard HS-LS1-4

differentiation in producing and maintaining complex organisms. This aligns with the

objective because students are differentiating between the four modes of asexual

reproduction.

These lessons align with overall curriculum goals and previous instruction because

students are still learning about processes in unicellular and multicellular organisms. In this case,

they had us learned about meiosis, which is needed for sexual reproduction in multicellular

organisms- and for these lessons they learned about mitosis, which is used for asexual

reproduction. Therefore they are building on previous instruction by continuing discussion about

cell division and with that comes similar vocabulary- just applying this vocabulary to a different

process!

Assessment Plan

The alignment table included (page ) describes which pre and post assessment items align

with which lesson objectives. The first lesson objective wants students to compare mitosis and

meiosis in order to answer HSA style questions about these processes. Therefore since students

are being asked to understand the difference between these two processes- they should be able to

apply their knowledge to answer application questions about the processes. That is why the first

objective aligns with pre-assessment multiple choice questions one, two, four, and five. These

questions ask students to look at diagrams, examples, or chromosome number in order to

differentiate between the processes. The second objective just wants students to be able to

differentiation between the four modes of asexual reproduction, which is why the vocabulary

matching aligned with this objective. If students can match definitions to the reproduction style-

this is a good indicator that they can differentiate between the four types of asexual reproduction.

Therefore there are two levels of understanding and two topics covered in the pre and post

assessments- an application level understanding of mitosis and a literal level understanding of

asexual reproduction.

After scoring the pre-assessment I was able to see the basic prior knowledge tat my

students already had. The average score for the pre-assessment was a 35%. From looking at the

breakdown of questions most frequently missed, I can see what most students already know

versus what needs the most clarification. Most students had a little understanding of what mitosis

is- but were definitely not ready to apply the content of mitosis. I was also able to see that they

generally understood asexual reproduction but had no ability to differentiate between the types of

asexual reproduction.

Students were given the pre-assessment on the day of the first lesson as a warm-up. While

students were reviewing meiosis, the co-teacher graded the pre-assessments the same class so that

we could group kids according to pre-assessment scores (for the vocabulary basketball game at

the end of class). Pre-assessment scores were also used to group students into their lab groups for

the asexual reproduction lesson. Pre-assessment scores were divided into basic, proficient, and

advanced. A student from each scoring section was placed in a lab group to have a diversity of

learning levels in a group to maximize group discussion and input. From looking at the

breakdown of questions it seemed as though most students already know what asexual

reproduction is, but could not distinguish between the different types. Therefore I made sure to

modify station time by allotting less time for the first station (an overview of asexual

reproduction) and more time for the other stations (types of asexual reproduction).

Other than pre and post-assessments, other formal and informal assessments were given

throughout the lesson to get a gauge of whether students were understanding and comprehending

information from the lesson. At the end of each lesson was a closure that assessed what students

learned from the lesson. For the mitosis lesson students were given a fill in the blank comparison

chart so that I was able to assess whether students really understood the difference between the

two processes. For the asexual reproduction lesson I gave the post-assessment as the closure

which assessed whether students could answer application questions about mitosis and

differentiate between the different types of asexual reproduction. Besides these formal

assessments, doing the discussion review of meiosis aloud and then discussion about mitosis

(from the video) as a whole group review helped me to see if students were understanding the two

processes. Major questioning was applied during this group discussion in order to reinforce the

differences. The basketball review game at the end of class also gave me a good idea of what

students were struggling based on who had trouble identifying whether a characteristic belonged

to mitosis or meiosis. Lastly, during the asexual reproduction lesson- questioning was also used in

class discussion after the lab stations were complete to make sure students had the correct answers

(because this worksheet becomes their notes). From this I was able to see that students still

needed clarification on vegetative propagation- so I was able to give them more examples of

vegetative propagation to clear the misconceptions. Informal assessments such as these are crucial

in teaching to ensure that students are staying on track, receiving the correct information, and

clarifying any misconceptions.

Instruction

In this series there are two lessons- one reviewing meiosis and learning about mitosis and

the other on asexual reproduction. The mitosis lesson began with the pre assessment where I

gauged student’s prior knowledge. This also gave them a heads up about what we would be

talking about for the next couple of days. They then completed notes on a review of meiosis and

then obtained brand new information about mitosis from a video. Students then completed a story

about mitosis as well as made their own application questions about mitosis. Lastly, students

practiced key mitosis and meiosis vocabulary by playing basketball! Students were given balls

that had phrases pertaining to either mitosis or meiosis and had to shoot the ball into the correct

bucket (labeled either mitosis or meiosis).

The second lesson was on asexual reproduction, which I started out having classes

brainstorm what they know about asexual reproduction. However, after the first class I taught this

lesson in, I realized I could use their mitosis application questions (written last class) as a good

review warm-up of mitosis which would then be a great Segway into asexual reproduction. For

this lesson, students started at their seats in lab groups where they were given about 7 minutes to

read a passage on asexual reproduction and answer questions. Students were then directed to a lab

station (each lab station explored a different type of asexual reproduction). They were given ten

minutes to read the passage, answer questions, and then observe that mode of asexual

reproduction. The class period came to a close by having students complete the post-assessment

questions.

Earlier in the introduction I alluded to how my lessons have been modified over and over

to meet the various needs of my students. Because of the large diversity in the classroom, much

modification was needed.

One thing that I modified lessons for was to fit the interests of my students. For

example, a lot of my students like music: therefore, I made a review lesson for photosynthesis by

having them create a rap about the process. I also know that a good portion of my students enjoy

basketball. Therefore I decided to incorporate basketball into a vocabulary review game. Students

were able to use basketballs to differentiate between phrases that pertained to meiosis versus

mitosis. This really increased engagement because students enjoyed getting to play basketball but

also got to review biology vocabulary as well.

Another way I modified my lesson was based on the percentage of students with

disabilities. A lot of students in this classroom require visual aid, aloud directions, extra time, and

more. Therefore I made little modifications similar to this in order to reach the lower-level

learners in the classroom who need extra support. Also, to ensure that every student was receiving

correct information- I made sure to review every worksheet that was going to become his/her

notes. Lastly, I created the lesson to meet the average reading skill of my class (a little less than

proficient). Therefore, I chose/modified the text to fit about a ninth grade reading level- that way

it was appropriate for basic as well as proficient readers. However, some students are lower-level

readers than this and require even more support. For these really low readers I made sure to offer

more support and guidance. I printed off copies of the reading as well as placed highlighters at

every station so that students could mark up the text if need be. Lastly, I pre-planned lab groups

based on reading ability so that struggling readers can be paired with more advanced readers.

Students really seemed to enjoy the lesson. They enjoyed being able to get up out of their

seats, use the microscope, and play with bubbles. They also responded extremely well to the

basketball review game because they got to incorporate something they enjoy with the biology

content. Because of how they responded to this game I will definitely use it as a review games

before test- and in other classes where student interest is not basketball- I will have to think of a

different game to suite their needs!

Analysis, Reflection, and Self Evaluation

Overall the lesson was a success. The last data analysis included was an evaluation of pre

versus post assessment scores. The pre assessment average was about a 35% while the post-

assessment scores increased to about a 75%! Students had an average 42% increase in score from

pre to the post assessment. This exemplifies the fact that the objectives were met and that students

actually learned something from the lesson.

I believe that the main reason this lesson was a success was because everything was

planned so well, everything was aligned perfectly. The objectives aligned with the standards,

which aligned with the pre assessment, which aligned with what students would learn about in the

lesson, which then all aligned with the post assessment. And students receiving a 75% average on

post-assessment definitely shows me that all parts of the lesson were correlated. Although this

project was very tedious and would be almost impossible to do for every class- some parts of this

project are going to be very useful in my future career. The alignment table, for example, is

something simple and quick that I am definitely going to continue to use because it really ensures

that your lesson is teaching what you want it to teach- and is almost a sure fire way of having a

successful lesson (although just like in science- nothing is perfect!).

Summary of Student Reading Scores

Student Number 2012 MSA Reading Score Reading Level1 52 Basic2 43 Basic3 407 Proficient4 41 Basic5 396 Proficient6 46 Basic7 398 Proficient8 386 Basic9 44 Basic

10 33 Basic11 414 Proficient12 41 Basic13 406 Proficient14 378 Basic15 409 Proficient16 420 Proficient17 76 Advanced

*Note: Students real names were not used. Instead they were given a number as a identifier. All of the data is accurate; only names were concealed in order to maintain confidentiality. *Note: MSA scores are variable due to the fact that some students took mod-MSA instead of the regular version of the MSA. Whether students took the MSA or mod-MSA- the reading level was still determined for each student using the scoring table to the right.

Determination of Reading Level

MSA Mod-MSA

Basic <391 <54

Proficient 391-425 54-66

Advanced >425 >66

Alignment Table

Objectives State Standards National StandardsAssessment Items from

Pre and Post-assessments

Instruction/Lesson Plan Items

Students will compare mitosis and meiosis in order to answer application HSA style questions about the two processes.

3.2.1. The student will explain processes and the function of related structures found in unicellular and multicellular organisms.

HS-LS1-4: Illustrate the role of cellular division (mitosis) and differentiation in producing and maintaining complex organisms.

HS-LS3-1: Ask questions to clarify relationships about the role of DNA and chromosomes in coding the instructions for characteristic traits passed from parent to offspring.

Pre-Assessment: Multiple Choice 1,2,4,5

Post-Assessment: Multiple Choice 1,2,3,5

Notes comparing mitosis and meiosis

Fill-in the blank story about mitosis helps students understand the process and its purpose

Developing own HSA style questions about mitosis

Closure- Graphic organizer comparing mitosis and meiosis

Students will define and observe different types of asexual reproduction in order to differentiate between the four modes.

3.2.1. The student will explain processes and the function of related structures found in unicellular and multicellular organisms.

HS-LS1-4: Illustrate the role of cellular division (mitosis) and differentiation in producing and maintaining complex organisms.

Pre-Assessment Vocabulary Matching Multiple Choice 3

Post-Assessment Vocabulary Matching Multiple Choice 4

Brainstorming about asexual reproduction

Lab stations for each type of asexual reproduction

Post-Assessment (vocabulary matching)

Summary of Classroom ProfileStudent Number Race Class Grade SWD Interests How She/he Learns Classroom Observations

1 African American D Y Basketball Move AroundNeeds prompting; head down a

lot

2 Multi-Racial E Y Music Move AroundNeeds prompting; slouches in

chair

3 Multi-Racial C Y Skateboarding Group (large or small)Needs constant prompting (even

taking notes)

4 African American C Y Music DiscussNeeds reassurance that she is

right

5 African American D N Video Games Move AroundConstantly migrates towards

computers

6 Caucasian B Y Music DiscussDoes not like to participate

aloud; very shy7 African American B N Basketball Move Around Always out of his seat; Calla out8 Native American D N Photography Draw Constantly doodles on paper

9 Caucasian D Y Basketball Move AroundAlways out of seat; needs

prompting10 Hispanic D Y Basketball Discuss Difficulty with language barrier11 Caucasian A N Reading Read Always reading

12 Multi-Racial C Y Basketball Small GroupNeeds small group work to build

up confidence13 Caucasian B N Music Take Notes Introverted; very shy14 Native American B N Video Games Draw Always doodling on paper15 Caucasian B N Music Take Notes Introverted; very shy16 Multi-Racial C N Basketball Take Notes Always out of seat17 African American C Y Basketball Move Around Calls out; does not raise hand

*Note: Students real names were not used. Instead they were given a number as a identifier. All of the data is accurate; only names were concealed in order to maintain confidentiality. *Note: Interests and type of learner was determined by conducting a student interest survey at the beginning of the semester.

Summary of Pre-Assessment vs. Post-Assessment Scores

Student Number Pre-Assessment(10 Possible)

Post-Assessment(10 possible)

1 4 62 3 43 4 74 5 95 3 86 4 7

7 2 38 4 69 5 8

10 5 911 4 912 3 1013 3 1014 4 815 6 716 2 717 4 10

*Note: Students real names were not used. Instead they were given a number as a identifier. All of the data is accurate; only names were concealed in order to maintain confidentiality.*Note: Pre and Post Assessment scores were out of 10. Recorded in the data table and the graph are the number of questions he/she got correct. In the graph, asterisks (*) signify pre-assessment scores and circles signify post-assessment scores.

Pre

Post